RE: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your
It's also one reason why BBCi doesn't assign page numbers to individual stories (there are other, more boring reasons as well!) Please do! I find this really interesting, for example News South West is 1670. what happens when we get the interactive streaming of Local TV? -- This email is intended for the named recipient(s) only. Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named recipient(s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the prior consent of Timothy-John Bishop. If you are not the intended recipient please discard this email and notify the sender as quickly as possible. This email and any attached files have been scanned for the presence of computer viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. Please note that electronic mail may be monitored in accordance with the Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practices) (Interception of Communications) Regulations 2000.
RE: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your idea commissioned.
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kirk Northrop > Sent: 15 January 2007 23:44 > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > Subject: Re: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your > idea commissioned. > > Brian Butterworth wrote: > > Any page, therefore, that has dropped out of the "Ceefax" > list could > > comprise of a single line (with the 'double height' > character in front of > > it) with the message "see news.bbc.co.uk/NNN".So even > if there was 300 > > 'pages' that hit (for Ceefax and Digital TV red button) users this > > would take the space of 12 Ceefax pages in terms of bandwidth and a > > few bytes each for digital TV. > > Do you not have to transmit the whole page, including blank > characters? Each line of teletext is broadcast on a line of the TV screen. They comprise of 40 characters (7 bit) with a 16-bit header which contains a 'row address' and the 'magazine number'. The magazine number is the first digit of the page number (1 for 100-1FF, 2 for 200-2FF, 7 for 700-7FF, 0 for 800-8FF). The header also contains various status codes, such as the ability to 'clear the screen' or leave the existing data there. If the page contains blank lines (such as after a line where the 'double height' character is used) then this row is simply not transmitted. Before each page a 'row 0' line is broadcast, again a single line. This has the 'magazine number' and the 16 bit (ie, 00 to FF) page number, and a 32 bit sub-page number which is usually referred to as the time, (-) because it was used for 'alarm clock' pages. As TV set controls only have 0 to 9 buttons the page numbers are usually used as binary coded decimal (BCD). Pages from different magazines can be interleaved because the data rows contain only the 'magazine number'. So you can broadcast different 'magazines' at different rates. So, the upshot is that when a page only contains two lines (such as 888) only three lines of data are broadcast for it, one header row which says 'magazine 8 page 88' and two rows of data 'magazine 8 row 20' and 'magazine 8 row 22'. The colours and graphics codes are implemented with values 01-1F, which occupy a character space. Sorry this is from Oracle, but here is a graphic: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/07/Oracle_data_organisation.jpg > > -- > From the North, this is Kirk > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To > unsubscribe, please visit > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release > Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your idea commissioned.
Brian Butterworth wrote: Any page, therefore, that has dropped out of the "Ceefax" list could comprise of a single line (with the 'double height' character in front of it) with the message "see news.bbc.co.uk/NNN".So even if there was 300 'pages' that hit (for Ceefax and Digital TV red button) users this would take the space of 12 Ceefax pages in terms of bandwidth and a few bytes each for digital TV. Do you not have to transmit the whole page, including blank characters? -- From the North, this is Kirk - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3?
At 18:37 + 15/1/07, Brian Butterworth wrote: So now I know... http://support.bbc.co.uk/ogg/old.shtml http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=site%3Asupport.bbc.co.uk&meta= And my favourite. http://support.bbc.co.uk/multicast/why.html :-) Gordo -- "Think Feynman"/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3?
At 19:36 + 15/1/07, Brian Butterworth wrote: Ian, I need the notifications for my other work and Outlook does not allow you to do them message by message. You can stop having to press 'Yes' or 'No' in Outlook by performing these steps: Tools/Options.../Email Options/Tracking Options Then choose "Always send a response" or "Never send a response" Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I use Eudora a relic from the BBC Networking Club installation disks... Gordo -- "Think Feynman"/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your idea commissioned.
Andrew Bowden wrote: However, the stories do still move around ;0) But do they move around more than they used to? I mean, in the olden days, if a big story was on 104 and a bigger story came in, it wouldn't necessarily go on 104 - but the big stories would be 104-110 and the smaller ones from then on. -- From the North, this is Kirk - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3?
Ian, I need the notifications for my other work and Outlook does not allow you to do them message by message. You can stop having to press 'Yes' or 'No' in Outlook by performing these steps: Tools/Options.../Email Options/Tracking Options Then choose "Always send a response" or "Never send a response" Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian > Smith (Irascian Ltd) > Sent: 15 January 2007 19:04 > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > Subject: RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3? > > Brian, > > Is there any chance you could turn off your email > tracking/acknowledgement feature in Outlook or whatever it is > you're using? > > It's irritating as hell to get endless "Do you want to send > an acknowledgement?" prompts with each new email you send, > immediately followed by the same again when I delete it. > > Thanks, > > Ian Smith > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian > Butterworth > Sent: 15 January 2007 18:38 > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > Subject: RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3? > > So now I know... > > http://support.bbc.co.uk/ogg/old.shtml > > http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=site%3Asupport.bbc.co.uk&meta= > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon Joly > > Sent: 15 January 2007 16:03 > > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > > Cc: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk; Jason Cartwright; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3? > > > > At 11:51 + 15/1/07, Jason Cartwright wrote: > > >It did previously, but not anymore (to my knowledge). > > > > > >http://support.bbc.co.uk/ogg/ > > > > > >J > > > > Thanks. I knew that, but wanted somebody else to remind me... > > > > > > :-) > > > > Gordo > > > > -- > > "Think Feynman"/ > > http://pobox.com/~gordo/ > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// > > - > > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, > > please visit > > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > > Unofficial list archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release > > Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release > Date: 14/01/2007 > 20:29 > > > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To > unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > > > > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To > unsubscribe, please visit > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release > Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3?
Brian, Is there any chance you could turn off your email tracking/acknowledgement feature in Outlook or whatever it is you're using? It's irritating as hell to get endless "Do you want to send an acknowledgement?" prompts with each new email you send, immediately followed by the same again when I delete it. Thanks, Ian Smith -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 15 January 2007 18:38 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3? So now I know... http://support.bbc.co.uk/ogg/old.shtml http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=site%3Asupport.bbc.co.uk&meta= > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon Joly > Sent: 15 January 2007 16:03 > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > Cc: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk; Jason Cartwright; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3? > > At 11:51 + 15/1/07, Jason Cartwright wrote: > >It did previously, but not anymore (to my knowledge). > > > >http://support.bbc.co.uk/ogg/ > > > >J > > Thanks. I knew that, but wanted somebody else to remind me... > > > :-) > > Gordo > > -- > "Think Feynman"/ > http://pobox.com/~gordo/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To > unsubscribe, please visit > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release > Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3?
So now I know... http://support.bbc.co.uk/ogg/old.shtml http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=site%3Asupport.bbc.co.uk&meta= > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon Joly > Sent: 15 January 2007 16:03 > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > Cc: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk; Jason Cartwright; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3? > > At 11:51 + 15/1/07, Jason Cartwright wrote: > >It did previously, but not anymore (to my knowledge). > > > >http://support.bbc.co.uk/ogg/ > > > >J > > Thanks. I knew that, but wanted somebody else to remind me... > > > :-) > > Gordo > > -- > "Think Feynman"/ > http://pobox.com/~gordo/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To > unsubscribe, please visit > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release > Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3?
At 11:51 + 15/1/07, Jason Cartwright wrote: It did previously, but not anymore (to my knowledge). http://support.bbc.co.uk/ogg/ J Thanks. I knew that, but wanted somebody else to remind me... :-) Gordo -- "Think Feynman"/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your idea commissioned.
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Bowden > Sent: 15 January 2007 14:16 > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > Subject: RE: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your > idea commissioned. > > > > That means that a top story is always 103, whilst the fifth most > > > important story is always 107. > > This is not correct. Page 102 lists the stories in 'most > important' > > order, > > viz: > > http://www.ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=101&subpage=0&channel= > > bbc1&search_st > > ring=101&fontsize=2 > > The order shown right now is 107 113 104 108 109 110 116 124 > > Getting my pages mixed up slightly - 101 is the main > headlines - akin I suppose to the main BBC News homepage (and > indeed the ordering is very similar). > > Meanwhile 102 is a mixture of UK and World News - although in > an editorial order. > > Meanwhile, 103 is actually a summary page :) > > However, the stories do still move around ;0) OK. My proposal is that the stories do not get reallocated and that there is a larger pool of page numbers, which are expired using the "live hit counts" from the BBC news website. Teletext transmission is done as "lines" and any line on a page that is blank is simply not tranmsitted. Any page, therefore, that has dropped out of the "Ceefax" list could comprise of a single line (with the 'double height' character in front of it) with the message "see news.bbc.co.uk/NNN".So even if there was 300 'pages' that hit (for Ceefax and Digital TV red button) users this would take the space of 12 Ceefax pages in terms of bandwidth and a few bytes each for digital TV. Personally I would move the regional news page numbers to 700-799 as these are no longer used, and 800-887, 889-899 are also free. > > > > What's important here is that the definition of what's the > > top story > > > will change during the day - maybe even during the hour. And > > > naturally it's all automated, based on the editorial > priorities the > > > editor of the section decides (and priorities are made cross > > > platform), which can change in a matter of minutes. > > Yes. I proposed that the pool of numbers expands to around 300. > > Which would be fine for digital platforms, although you > couldn't really do it until you get to a point where Ceefax has gone. > > The thing is about page numbers is that they've grown > essentially out of a technical necessisty rather than a > unique identifier. For "analogue" > text services (which are of course digital) the number is an > ID - the only way to navigate. And you can only have so many > numbers. So to increase the pool on Ceefax means losing > other content elsewhere as you'd nick their numbers! > > > > As I understand it, the massive text (I like that term!) > is manually > > > edited into a graphics system - it's quicker and more > flexible that > > > way. > > Again, it's only a question of the person in charge of the MASSIVE > > text (it's about two a half inches high on my TV) just > needs to look > > up the right number. > > Which - it has to be said - is easier said than done, because > the person doing the text is probably doing several other > things at the same time and is unlikely to have time to spend > to match the story on screen with what's going on in the > content systems. > > > > Actually it's also rare that stories break online before TV > > - that's > > > mainly because it takes longer to write out a story than > it does to > > > quickly pick up a microphone and talk. > > I do recall occasions where News 24 has been linked to the "online > > studio" > > and an important news story has been heard over the PA > system. I have > > often seen headlines appear on the news.bbc.co.uk latest > box and not > > appear on News 24 for some time afterwards. > > It does happen - however the converse definitely is true. > The number of times I've seen breaking news on News 24 and > gone to the website and found nothing... Well it's more than > once. And that is the nature of the beast. Online and TV > journalism work in different ways which means it is harder > (not impossible, but harder) to bring them together in a > coherent way - especially when you're up against it time wise > (as people in TV seem to always be!) > > > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To > unsubscribe, please visit > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release > Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To u
RE: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your idea commissioned.
Just as a follow-up, I would stick the numbers in the right eighth of the screen which is visible to 16:19 (ie, digital) viewers and on the scroller, something like this: http://www.ukfree.tv/styles/images/misc/idea1.jpg http://www.ukfree.tv/styles/images/misc/idea2.jpg (Sorry, I don't have the right font installed, but you get the idea I hope) Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv > > (Like George, I'm also a producer in the interactive TV > department at > > the BBC ;) > > > > > I'm assuming that the Ceefax system, WAP system and XML feeds are > > > driven from content from the website. > > > > It's fair to say that all four come from the same system - > obviously > > the web gets the full story whilst other platforms may get > "cut down" > > versions. I say "cut down" - content is written according > to a style > > guide in order that the story makes sense in different > situations. So > > BBCi gets the first four paragraphs of a story, and journalists > > writing a story will know to get the full sense of the > story done in > > four paragraphs, then anything below it is extra information. > > > > Or something like that - I'm not a content producer so it's not my > > forte. I'm more into systems and processes. > > Preferably evil ones! > > > > > Currently, as each webpage is published it will be considered for > > > inclusion on the feeds that provides Ceefax (and WAP and > XML feeds). > > > Each page will be one of: > > > > > 1)A web page that has more priority over one that exists > > > in the page > > > numbering pool. The least important page is dropped from the > > > numbering pool and is allocated the ejected page's number. > > > 2)Be an update for an existing story, where the existing > > > story's page > > > number is reused. > > > 3)Rejected because of relative unimportance. > > > There is, in effect, a database of Ceefax Page Numbers > > (CPN) which are > > > references to the web page they were created from. > > > > There is a database, however stories are assigned numbers > on the basis > > of their editoral priority - and a priority at the time you're > > watching. > > > > That means that a top story is always 103, whilst the fifth most > > important story is always 107. > > This is not correct. Page 102 lists the stories in 'most > important' order, viz: > > http://www.ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=101&subpage=0&channel= > bbc1&search_string=101&fontsize=2 > > The order shown right now is 107 113 104 108 109 110 116 124 > > > What's important here is that the definition of what's the > top story > > will change during the day - maybe even during the hour. And > > naturally it's all automated, based on the editorial priorities the > > editor of the section decides (and priorities are made cross > > platform), which can change in a matter of minutes. > > Yes. I proposed that the pool of numbers expands to around 300. > > > I think that's where the problems come in - the lack of > stability does > > prevent the promotion of content by a specific page number, > which is > > why for Ceefax, they'll only promote what they know is present at a > > number all the time - the main news headlines on 101 for example. > > It's also one reason why BBCi doesn't assign page numbers to > > individual stories (there are other, more boring reasons as well!) > > News headlines are on 101, 102 is the news index, viz: > > http://www.ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=101&subpage=0&channel= > bbc1&search_string=101&fontsize=2 > > http://www.ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=102&subpage=1&channel= > bbc1&search_string=102&fontsize=2 > > > > Of course that's how it's done now, and that doesn't need > to always be > > so in the future. > > > > > When the channel is used on analogue (as it will be for > > another five > > > years) pressing TXT and the number will give you the page too. > > > > In some regions only - Border's switching off next year for example! > > > > > As the MASSIVE TEXT that you have on News 24 and World is a > > headline, > > > which too can reference a CPN. Also breaking news can > > indicate that > > > stories are online before on air. > > > > As I understand it, the massive text (I like that term!) is > manually > > edited into a graphics system - it's quicker and more flexible that > > way. > > Again, it's only a question of the person in charge of the > MASSIVE text (it's about two a half inches high on my TV) > just needs to look up the right number. > > > Actually it's also rare that stories break online before TV > - that's > > mainly because it takes longer to write out a story than it does to > > quickly pick up a microphone and talk. > > I do recall occasions where News 24 has been linked to the > "online studio" and an important news story has been heard > over the PA system. I have often seen headlines appear on > the news.bbc.co.uk latest box and not appear on News 24 for > so
RE: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your idea commissioned.
> > That means that a top story is always 103, whilst the fifth most > > important story is always 107. > This is not correct. Page 102 lists the stories in 'most > important' order, > viz: > http://www.ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=101&subpage=0&channel= > bbc1&search_st > ring=101&fontsize=2 > The order shown right now is 107 113 104 108 109 110 116 124 Getting my pages mixed up slightly - 101 is the main headlines - akin I suppose to the main BBC News homepage (and indeed the ordering is very similar). Meanwhile 102 is a mixture of UK and World News - although in an editorial order. Meanwhile, 103 is actually a summary page :) However, the stories do still move around ;0) > > What's important here is that the definition of what's the > top story > > will change during the day - maybe even during the hour. And > > naturally it's all automated, based on the editorial priorities the > > editor of the section decides (and priorities are made cross > > platform), which can change in a matter of minutes. > Yes. I proposed that the pool of numbers expands to around 300. Which would be fine for digital platforms, although you couldn't really do it until you get to a point where Ceefax has gone. The thing is about page numbers is that they've grown essentially out of a technical necessisty rather than a unique identifier. For "analogue" text services (which are of course digital) the number is an ID - the only way to navigate. And you can only have so many numbers. So to increase the pool on Ceefax means losing other content elsewhere as you'd nick their numbers! > > As I understand it, the massive text (I like that term!) is > > manually > > edited into a graphics system - it's quicker and more flexible that > > way. > Again, it's only a question of the person in charge of the > MASSIVE text (it's about two a half inches high on my TV) > just needs to look up the right number. Which - it has to be said - is easier said than done, because the person doing the text is probably doing several other things at the same time and is unlikely to have time to spend to match the story on screen with what's going on in the content systems. > > Actually it's also rare that stories break online before TV > - that's > > mainly because it takes longer to write out a story than it does to > > quickly pick up a microphone and talk. > I do recall occasions where News 24 has been linked to the > "online studio" > and an important news story has been heard over the PA > system. I have often seen headlines appear on the > news.bbc.co.uk latest box and not appear on News 24 for some > time afterwards. It does happen - however the converse definitely is true. The number of times I've seen breaking news on News 24 and gone to the website and found nothing... Well it's more than once. And that is the nature of the beast. Online and TV journalism work in different ways which means it is harder (not impossible, but harder) to bring them together in a coherent way - especially when you're up against it time wise (as people in TV seem to always be!) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your idea commissioned.
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Bowden > Sent: 15 January 2007 11:39 > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk > Subject: RE: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your > idea commissioned. > > (Like George, I'm also a producer in the interactive TV > department at the BBC ;) > > > I'm assuming that the Ceefax system, WAP system and XML feeds are > > driven from content from the website. > > It's fair to say that all four come from the same system - > obviously the web gets the full story whilst other platforms > may get "cut down" > versions. I say "cut down" - content is written according to > a style guide in order that the story makes sense in > different situations. So BBCi gets the first four paragraphs > of a story, and journalists writing a story will know to get > the full sense of the story done in four paragraphs, then > anything below it is extra information. > > Or something like that - I'm not a content producer so it's > not my forte. I'm more into systems and processes. > Preferably evil ones! > > > Currently, as each webpage is published it will be considered for > > inclusion on the feeds that provides Ceefax (and WAP and XML feeds). > > Each page will be one of: > > > 1) A web page that has more priority over one that exists > > in the page > > numbering pool. The least important page is dropped from the > > numbering pool and is allocated the ejected page's number. > > 2) Be an update for an existing story, where the existing > > story's page > > number is reused. > > 3) Rejected because of relative unimportance. > > There is, in effect, a database of Ceefax Page Numbers > (CPN) which are > > references to the web page they were created from. > > There is a database, however stories are assigned numbers on > the basis of their editoral priority - and a priority at the > time you're watching. > > That means that a top story is always 103, whilst the fifth > most important story is always 107. This is not correct. Page 102 lists the stories in 'most important' order, viz: http://www.ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=101&subpage=0&channel=bbc1&search_st ring=101&fontsize=2 The order shown right now is 107 113 104 108 109 110 116 124 > What's important here is that the definition of what's the > top story will change during the day - maybe even during the > hour. And naturally it's all automated, based on the > editorial priorities the editor of the section decides (and > priorities are made cross platform), which can change in a > matter of minutes. Yes. I proposed that the pool of numbers expands to around 300. > I think that's where the problems come in - the lack of > stability does prevent the promotion of content by a specific > page number, which is why for Ceefax, they'll only promote > what they know is present at a number all the time - the main > news headlines on 101 for example. It's also one reason why > BBCi doesn't assign page numbers to individual stories (there > are other, more boring reasons as well!) News headlines are on 101, 102 is the news index, viz: http://www.ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=101&subpage=0&channel=bbc1&search_st ring=101&fontsize=2 http://www.ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=102&subpage=1&channel=bbc1&search_st ring=102&fontsize=2 > Of course that's how it's done now, and that doesn't need to > always be so in the future. > > > When the channel is used on analogue (as it will be for > another five > > years) pressing TXT and the number will give you the page too. > > In some regions only - Border's switching off next year for example! > > > As the MASSIVE TEXT that you have on News 24 and World is a > headline, > > which too can reference a CPN. Also breaking news can > indicate that > > stories are online before on air. > > As I understand it, the massive text (I like that term!) is > manually edited into a graphics system - it's quicker and > more flexible that way. Again, it's only a question of the person in charge of the MASSIVE text (it's about two a half inches high on my TV) just needs to look up the right number. > Actually it's also rare that stories break online before TV - > that's mainly because it takes longer to write out a story > than it does to > quickly pick up a microphone and talk. I do recall occasions where News 24 has been linked to the "online studio" and an important news story has been heard over the PA system. I have often seen headlines appear on the news.bbc.co.uk latest box and not appear on News 24 for some time afterwards. And, as I said before, if there is no online content then there is no real issue about having a number to link to it because ipso facto there is no content to link to. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/626 - Release Date: 14/01/2007 20:29 - Sent via the backstage.b
RE: [backstage] Five Live Partnership - get your idea commissioned.
(Like George, I'm also a producer in the interactive TV department at the BBC ;) > I'm assuming that the Ceefax system, WAP system and XML feeds > are driven from content from the website. It's fair to say that all four come from the same system - obviously the web gets the full story whilst other platforms may get "cut down" versions. I say "cut down" - content is written according to a style guide in order that the story makes sense in different situations. So BBCi gets the first four paragraphs of a story, and journalists writing a story will know to get the full sense of the story done in four paragraphs, then anything below it is extra information. Or something like that - I'm not a content producer so it's not my forte. I'm more into systems and processes. Preferably evil ones! > Currently, as each webpage is published it will be considered > for inclusion on the feeds that provides Ceefax (and WAP and > XML feeds). > Each page will be one of: > 1)A web page that has more priority over one that exists > in the page > numbering pool. The least important page is dropped from the > numbering pool and is allocated the ejected page's number. > 2)Be an update for an existing story, where the existing > story's page > number is reused. > 3)Rejected because of relative unimportance. > There is, in effect, a database of Ceefax Page Numbers (CPN) > which are references to the web page they were created from. There is a database, however stories are assigned numbers on the basis of their editoral priority - and a priority at the time you're watching. That means that a top story is always 103, whilst the fifth most important story is always 107. What's important here is that the definition of what's the top story will change during the day - maybe even during the hour. And naturally it's all automated, based on the editorial priorities the editor of the section decides (and priorities are made cross platform), which can change in a matter of minutes. I think that's where the problems come in - the lack of stability does prevent the promotion of content by a specific page number, which is why for Ceefax, they'll only promote what they know is present at a number all the time - the main news headlines on 101 for example. It's also one reason why BBCi doesn't assign page numbers to individual stories (there are other, more boring reasons as well!) Of course that's how it's done now, and that doesn't need to always be so in the future. > When the channel is used on analogue (as it will be for > another five years) pressing TXT and the number will give you > the page too. In some regions only - Border's switching off next year for example! > As the MASSIVE TEXT that you have on News 24 and World is a > headline, which too can reference a CPN. Also breaking news > can indicate that stories are online before on air. As I understand it, the massive text (I like that term!) is manually edited into a graphics system - it's quicker and more flexible that way. Actually it's also rare that stories break online before TV - that's mainly because it takes longer to write out a story than it does to quickly pick up a microphone and talk. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3?
It did previously, but not anymore (to my knowledge). http://support.bbc.co.uk/ogg/ J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon Joly Sent: 15 January 2007 08:10 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3? At 10:16 + 13/1/07, Gordon Joly wrote: >After thoughts. > >Web 0.0 - info.cern.ch (via the command line) > >Web 1.0 - HTML + Netscape > >Web 2.0 - httpd + mysql + php (e.g. Mediawiki and phpGedView) > Afterthought 2.0 Mediawiki and related projects that use Mediawiki are committed to open source formats and principles (unlike the BBC), for example Wikimedia Commons. http://commons.wikimedia.org/ http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Welcome Wikimedia Commons will only allow "ogg" format files for audio and video; hence not Real Media, Windows Media format, Shockave Flash etc. Does the BBC distribute anything in ogg formats? Gordo -- "Think Feynman"/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] What is web 1, 2, and 3?
At 10:16 + 13/1/07, Gordon Joly wrote: After thoughts. Web 0.0 - info.cern.ch (via the command line) Web 1.0 - HTML + Netscape Web 2.0 - httpd + mysql + php (e.g. Mediawiki and phpGedView) Afterthought 2.0 Mediawiki and related projects that use Mediawiki are committed to open source formats and principles (unlike the BBC), for example Wikimedia Commons. http://commons.wikimedia.org/ http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Welcome Wikimedia Commons will only allow "ogg" format files for audio and video; hence not Real Media, Windows Media format, Shockave Flash etc. Does the BBC distribute anything in ogg formats? Gordo -- "Think Feynman"/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
