[uf-new] Microformat for Music Downloads

[Manu Sporny]

Scott Reynen wrote:
> I think Martin was talking about this problem:
> http://microformats.org/wiki/music-examples#The_Problem
> 
> Which is much simpler than the media info problem:
> http://microformats.org/wiki/media-info-brainstorming#The_Problem

I'm probably being dense. The problem description on music-examples
seems like a subset of the problem description in media-info. Am I
misunderstanding the problem description on either page?

Can anybody help clarify the difference between the two?

> hAtom is not only for feeds; it's for "practically any other place Atom
> may be used," and feeds are only the most prominent example of that. 
> hAtom contains a title, description, and item for download, which is
> very close to what's needed for music downloads.

Agreed, but I didn't think that it was the sole purpose for the
music-examples problem description. Again, am I misunderstanding the
problem description for music-examples? I've spoken with Dean Hudson at
SubPop (one of the authors of the music-examples page) and my
understanding of what he was shooting for didn't include anything in the
hAtom/hReview ballpark. It was more complicated. It seemed to me that
music-examples problem description was a subset of media-info... I can
talk to him again... perhaps Rod Begbie could clarify the difference
between the two as well?

> Many of the sites you surveyed don't have audio downloads available, so
> while they may be relevant to the media-info work, they're outside the
> scope of music downloads.

Are we differentiating a sample from a download? If so, what makes that
differentiation?

In dealing with music and video thus far, a pattern is starting to
emerge that shows no strong overlap between the two. It is still too
early to tell, more research will have to be done, but it looks like
music and video are not sharing many common pieces of information -
there is around a 50% overlap in the meta-data between the two formats.

If we were to take all of the results from music and video and analyze
them together the resulting media-info microformat would look different
than one where we created a music-media-info microformat and a
video-media-info microformat. It seems like there might be evidence for
a separate music-media-info and a video-media-info microformat. I'm
assuming the community doesn't want to do something like that, correct?

-- manu