Hello, Forgot to send this to the list.
On 12/16/05, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Tantek, > > On 12/16/05, Tantek Çelik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Charles, > > > > I am emailing you directly on this because it appears you have not received > > earlier email sent on this subject. > > > > Regarding: > > > > On 12/13/05 4:19 PM, "Charles Iliya Krempeaux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > On 12/6/05, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > >> If you look at my weblog -- http://changelog.ca/ -- you can see a > > >> couple XOXO lists where I list (some of) the shows I watch, and (some > > >> of) the channels I watch. > > > > > > I've created a wiki page for showrolls at: > > > > > > http://microformats.org/wiki/showroll-brainstorming > > > > and > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I've started a page for the "show brainstorming" on the wiki. You can > > > get to it via: > > > > > > http://microformats.org/wiki/show-brainstorming > > > > > > > > > > First, please take a closer look at the microformats process. > > > > http://microformats.org/wiki/process > > > > > > A few comments in particular. > > > > 1. Jumping straight to a *-brainstorming document is premature. There > > should first be a *-examples document where *real* *existing* examples of > > the content being published on the Web are documented. > > The "show-brainstorming" page contained strawmen of examples I found. > I was hesitant to give links to the examples I found because most of > them were from Adult sites. (Although my motivation is for non-adult > material, adult examples are easier to find.) > > If people are OK with me posting links to that kind of material (for > examples) I'll do so. But I (perhaps wrongly) suspected they > wouldn't. > > Let me know though. > > > > > Second there should > > be a *-formats document where previous/current *formats* that attempt to > > solve the problem are documented. Neither of these have been created, and > > the process page is quite clear about this. > > I'll admit that I should have read the process page more closely. But > I have been documenting what I've been seeing in the wild on the > show-brainstorming page. (In the section titled " Current Practice".) > Would it be sufficient to just move these to a page called > "show-formats"? > > > > 2. As far as I can tell, this is nothing but a link to a piece of media, in > > particular video. This is ignoring (since it doesn't even mention it), > > several existing standards and microformats: > > > > a. To indicate that the type of data being linked to is video, use the > > appropriate mime type, e.g. <a type="video/mpeg" href="show.mpg">...</a> > > > > b. rel-enclosure handles the "download this" semantic already. > > > > There is nowhere near enough justification for a new microformat for this. > > The motivation behind a "show microformat" is to.... (1) tell you how > to play the media file(s). (This is especially important when there > is more than one file, or alternatives.) (2) attach (more) metadata > to the show (and not just the individual media files). (But most > importantly, it's about telling you how to "play" a set of media > files.) > > It's not just about pre-downloading stuff. It's more about "how to > play it". (If you look at some of the previous stuff I've written in > reference to this type of thing, I mention <a>'s type attribute and > rel-enclosure. In fact, I did expect them to be important parts of a > "show microformat".) > > > 3. AFAIK, there has been no attempt to work with this within the current > > media-metadata or video-metadata work/research. > > I'm a little unclear about what you mean by this -- what you mean by > "work within". (Do you just mean put all this stuff on one of those 2 > pages?) I referenced those works. And mentioned that it should be > used for its "metadata" work. None of those pages seemed to say > anything about "playing" (which is what I was trying to work on with > the "show-brainstorming" page.) (But perhaps "playing" information > could be considered "metadata". I didn't think it would be.) > > If you could explain this more, I'd be happy to work on this from that angle. > > > > Rather than inventing a > > new media related microformat, please first understand existing work towards > > media microformats, and work within that research. > > > > http://microformats.org/wiki/media-metadata-examples > > > > This has been requested several times in this thread. > > I never received any of those messages. (I don't even seem them in > the Microformats mailing list archive.) > > > Rather than creating new pages for a specific type of media microformat, > > please instead work on the media-metadata-* pages. There has been a lot of > > thinking by a lot of smart folks put into trying to figure out > > media-metadata (even just links), and ignoring that is blatant violation of > > the process -- don't ignore nor reinvent earlier work. > > Given that what I'm trying to address is "playing" of media, do you > still feel that I should be going at this from those pages? > > > I also noticed this: http://microformats.org/wiki/microshow > > > > 1. See above problems. > > > > 2. Please do not create a microformat page for something for which there > > isn't even a strawman specification in the *-brainstorming page. Shell > > pages like this one will be deleted. > > OK. -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___________________________________________________________________________ Never forget where you came from _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
