Re: [backstage] DMI prototype - a global media hub
Richard, Very interested in your angle here. Concur with others on this list that this is indeed synergistic with Kendra Initiative vision [1]. EU funding for Kendra is imminent [2]. Currently on world tour evangelizing Kendra so time constrained [3]. However, in London for a media networking party on October 12th [4]. Do come along and meet other media visionaries and we can also chat about moving this forward. Moving website to Drupal CMS in the new year so hope that Kendra ecosystem will flourish with user participation [5]. And will create more formal ways to join and raise funds - there is good support [6]. Solutions to an interoperable open media marketplace need to be cross industry, cross sector, cross media and cross format. Hope to see you on the 12th... Cheers Daniel [1] http://www.kendra.org.uk [2] http://www.kendra.org.uk/wiki/wiki.pl?P2P-Next [3] http://www.kendra.org.uk/wiki/wiki.pl?KendraWorldTour [4] http://www.kendra.org.uk/wiki/wiki.pl?KendraParty20071012 [5] http://www.kendra.org.uk/wiki/wiki.pl?KendraWebsiteUpdate [6] http://www.kendra.org.uk/wiki/wiki.pl?KendraPosters Daniel Harris, Founder, Kendra Initiative [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: +44 20 7993 6339 mobile: +44 7978 801 500 http://www.kendra.org.uk skype/aim/yahoo/jabber/irc: dahacouk On 04/10/2007 11:37 Brendan Quinn wrote: you might be interested in this, daniel? *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Richard Cartwright *Sent:* 03 October 2007 21:53 *To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk *Subject:* [backstage] DMI prototype - a global media hub Having left the BBC back in February when I was aware of initial rumblings of the Digital Media Initiative, I was pleased to see that the BBC released information about DMI through Backstage. Joined-up end-to-end production of cross-media services will deliver a whole load of new and exciting services to the user and DMI is about providing the core technology for the capture, production, distribution and archive to do just that. For some great examples of the services of the future, see the use cases developed as part of the micro-navigation of data under development by “JUMMP: Joined Up Metadata for Media Playback” http://www.jummp.net/ I have a very ambitious idea about implementing a prototype version of the DMI model outside of the BBC using only open-source tools and open standards, possibly hosted in an environment such as the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud with the Amazon Simple Storage Service (http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html?node=3435361). My vision is to create a global media hub using web services. Rather than using the data model released by the BBC, the prototype would map the concepts contained in the model to existing open standards, such as: * Advanced Authoring Format and Material Exchange Format (AAF/MXF) for wrapping essence (video, audio, data) with its metadata (http://www.amwa.tv/), including edit decision lists, as supported by Avid, Quantel, Adobe et al.; * Ingex for low-cost content ingest of file-based content (http://ingex.sourceforge.net/); * Descriptive Metadata Scheme DMS-1 – a standard and extensible set of metadata to use in describing production content (SMPTE 380M downloadable for a fee from http://store.smpte.org/), which can be mapped to any of the following: o Dublin Core (http://dublincore.org/), o TV Anytime (http://www.tv-anytime.org/), o MPEG-7 (http://www.chiariglione.org/mpeg/standards/mpeg-7/mpeg-7.htm); * MPEG-21 for expressing rights management information (http://www.chiariglione.org/mpeg/standards/mpeg-21/mpeg-21.htm); * MXF Mastering Format – for management of multiple versions of the similar content (different languages, title sequences for the same core video content etc.) (also http://www.amwa.tv/); * Open Document Format for scripts, financial data, presentations, diagrams etc. associated with a production (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office). All of the above standards should be generic enough to avoid the need to commit to any specific codec. What surprises me is that the data model as released by the BBC makes no external reference to existing standards such as those listed above. Surely this conflicts with a stated aim of DMI ... that it should “support open standards”? So what is my motivation? I am about to release an open-source API for AAF in Java that can be deployed to JBoss (http://www.portability4media.com/publications/p4m_ibc2007_handout.pdf) and this would be the ultimate project to test it with. My concept is to set up a load-balanced cluster of JBoss application servers, possibly configured as a JBoss ESB, and to create process orchestration driven by JBPM (see http://www.jboss.org). Business processes
Re: [backstage] Thoughts from a previous BBC employee
On 10/8/07, Gavin Montague [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, I'll stand by my bitch/point about the beeb at dconstruct. The general consensus amongst the people I spoke to was that the BBC wasn't relevant to them as developers. As consumers, yes, but as developers, no. Why *should* the BBC be relevant to them as developers? Were they also complaining about all the other large media organisations that weren't relevant to them as developers? Yes, I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate, but I'm also genuinely (if possibly naively) wondering about these questions. Is it just part of the way everyone in the UK feels the BBC should be more relevant to their individual needs because they pay for it directly (rather than indirectly) and developers are no different? Or is there a reason why the BBC should be providing tools for developers to do stuff more than all other UK media organisations do? Part of me wonders whether the BBC should get on with making good content, telling stories, (whether on- or offline) and stop attempting to be an internet startup. -- http://www.gyford.com/ - 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] Thoughts from a previous BBC employee
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phil Gyford Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 10:01 AM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Thoughts from a previous BBC employee On 10/8/07, Gavin Montague [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, I'll stand by my bitch/point about the beeb at dconstruct. The general consensus amongst the people I spoke to was that the BBC wasn't relevant to them as developers. As consumers, yes, but as developers, no. Why *should* the BBC be relevant to them as developers? Were they also complaining about all the other large media organisations that weren't relevant to them as developers? Yes, I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate, but I'm also genuinely (if possibly naively) wondering about these questions. Is it just part of the way everyone in the UK feels the BBC should be more relevant to their individual needs because they pay for it directly (rather than indirectly) and developers are no different? Or is there a reason why the BBC should be providing tools for developers to do stuff more than all other UK media organisations do? Part of me wonders whether the BBC should get on with making good content, telling stories, (whether on- or offline) and stop attempting to be an internet startup. I think that's part of the answer: the content. As the national broadcaster of record, the BBC has the largest pool of content available in this country (and probably many others). In some sense this content 'belongs' to us, even if only as a component of shared culture or cultures. Part of the BBC's responsibility is to make that content available to those it belongs to. If that includes tools for developers to access and aggregate that content to be able to re-present it, then that is what they should provide. The BBC is, for better or worse, in this country subject to different rules and constraints to other broadcasters (though Channel 4 shares - or at least should share - some of the same ethos) because of its place in national culture and its public funding. * To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go to http://www.hull.ac.uk/legal/email_disclaimer.html *
Re: [backstage] Thoughts from a previous BBC employee
So yes once again there are some good points in the thread. We have been knocking on peoples doors about more feeds and api's and I do believe once we have the API gateway system in place, you guys will finally see more of them. Also look out for more diverse API's because the API gateway should protect almost any kind of API we want to make public. Oh and don't get me started on the API will be the Accessibility of Web 2.0 thread. :) Our partnerships with other large companies like Yahoo and Google has been important for us and them. Not only because of the big events like Hackday (who else would put on such an event?) but because we can collaborate in a way that no one else would ever dare. For example we're still in talks with some large companies and a couple of government agencies about making there API's available under our licence. Who else would they trust with there data? The sponsorship of events is always going to be tricky, but we tend to sponsor small grassroots events. D.construct is bigger that ever before and we were one of the original sponsors back 3 years ago when it was just a small one day conference. This year we again sponsored D.construct and paid for the Food and Venue of the after party at Audio (Yahoo paid for the drinks [1]). I even got up on stage and said this to the huge crowd of developers. And _everyone_ agrees that the after party at Audio this year was the best ever. On the sponsorship front, we are also going to start supporting even smaller grassroot events by giving each event organiser a chance to put forward themselves for sponsorship. This means your local Ruby, Python, SVG, XSL group could afford that venue room which has been out of the question. Least we forget the University work we have been doing to increase the profile of development in the UK economy. We're not going to change the face of education but with partners from the Angel funding and Venture sectors, we will see more respect for developers in the future. And this is just the start... We do believe in this sector and the BBC is in it for the long term. We haven't always been as transparent as we could have been, for example the Backstage Wild West servers we announced at Hackday have been up and running for months now. But that's changing... We aim to be a lot more transparent and as the number of participators (developers, designers, bloggers, hackers, etc, etc) grows, we will stay relevant and facilitate there deeper relationship with the BBC. Take care, Ian Forrester [1] Great picture Murray from Yahoo with the drinks bill, notice the Backstage Lanyard btw - http://www.flickr.com/photos/cubicgarden/1356473775/ Matthew Cashmore wrote: There are some really fair points here... Firstly I think the BBC is a lot more relevant to developers than most other broadcasters - I think backstage is testament to that - but I also don't think that we've necessarily made ourselves as relevant as we could. I think we've all been disappointed by the lack of new APIs and feeds that we've released over the last 12 months - no excuses - this is because we've been focusing on being part of the community, being at the conferences and talking to people about what they want.. .this has perhaps left us with a little less internal work than we may have otherwise done... But... What it has achieved is a much bigger buy-in to what we want to do - we've essentially been running around inside the beeb shouting - developers are cool! Work with them. Now we have to concentrate on making that stuff actually available to you - part of that is the new website, part of that is the new totally developer focused list, and part of that is us spending more of our time making these things actually available and working. Giving you the tools to really get inside the beeb and it's systems. To that end we've been working really hard on getting an API gateway online - that's nearly complete - we've been working really hard on making sure that when an API goes live it's properly documented etc... All of these things take time, and I'll be the first to admit that releasing new feeds and APIs has therefore taken a knock. I asked the developer list last week what feeds and APIs they want to see - that is now my number one priority - actually making that stuff available. Ian is furiously typing away right now about the importance of working with the rest of the industry and encouraging developer growth within the UK... Coming soon to an email client near you. m On 9/10/07 11:47, Phil Gyford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/9/07, Gavin Montague [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No one I spoke to said that Channel 4 wasn't relevant to them as developers. However, Channel 4 hadn't shelled out to sponsor a web development conference. Fair enough - I wasn't aware of the sponsorship thing. I'm inclined to think they should stop producing cruft like Strictly Come Dancing
Re: [backstage] New TV Listing Design
Interesting. It's a bit like this... http://www.marumushi.com/apps/newsmap/newsmap.cfm?layout=0selected=ukcategories=world,nation,business,technology,sports,entertainment,health I can't see a broadcaster wanting this kind of EPG on their system, as it removes the channel identities. Perhaps it could help Sky? http://www.screendigest.com/online_services/intelligence/tv_and_broadband/updates/tvi-051007-gbb1/show On 09/10/2007, Mr I Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://radar.oreilly.com/Picture%2052.html Full story - http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/09/throng_unveils.html I saw this while browsing my rss aggregator. Seems like a decent design for a TV Guide. I was wondering how it would work if placed on one of those really long interactive smile mit timelines. - 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/ -- Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv
Re: [backstage] New TV Listing Design
On 10/9/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't see a broadcaster wanting this kind of EPG on their system, as it removes the channel identities. As a viewer, do you really need to know which channel a programme is on before you decide to watch it? I suppose there are a few cases where this would be useful (eg: Scrubs is on now - is it the series I've been watching on E4, or the series I've already seen twice on Paramount?), but generally if I'm channel-hopping, I don't really care. On the other hand, if the broadcaster is showing something unpopular, it may not show in the cloud, in which case the channel-hopper won't know it's on, and won't watch it. That's something for a broadcaster to be concerned about - but maybe they should show better programmes. Perhaps it could help Sky? http://www.screendigest.comhttp://www.screendigest.com/online_services/intelligence/tv_and_broadband/updates/tvi-051007-gbb1/show /online_services/intelligence/tv_and_broadband/updates/tvi-051007-gbb1/show http://www.screendigest.com/online_services/intelligence/tv_and_broadband/updates/tvi-051007-gbb1/show AIUI, a large part of Sky's capacity problem is to do with their receivers still being built to more or less the same spec as when they launched in 1998. There are many things in them which could be done better, but Sky are obviously keen to keep the user experience identical to all their users, so haven't brought in features which might only work on newer boxes. And you never know, they may even have users in mind and realise that 700 channels is just too damn many to flick through. - martin
Re: [backstage] Thoughts from a previous BBC employee
At 14:09 +0100 9/10/07, Mr I Forrester wrote: [...] Our partnerships with other large companies like Yahoo and Google has been important for us and them. [...] But the BBC is a corporation, and not a company? It has no need to make profits, for example. 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/
