Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-18 Thread Joshua Kinberg
 Okay, but what does appending the file type as a query string help? As far
 as I can tell it only break stuff because people use your pop-up link
 generator which has links like URL:
 http://www.michaelverdi.com/popup.php?url=http://michaelverdi.com/video/dresscode.mov
  that are not media links, but links to HTML pages.

Nope.. this is why I created the popup link generator thingie.

It uses the popup URL for the onclick handler, but the href attribute
is still the direct link to the media file and that direct link is
what gets enclosed in the RSS feed.

But this has little to do with the conversation here...

-Josh


On 3/17/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Okay, but what does appending the file type as a query string help? As far
 as I can tell it only break stuff because people use your pop-up link
 generator which has links like URL:
 http://www.michaelverdi.com/popup.php?url=http://michaelverdi.com/video/dresscode.mov
  that are not media links, but links to HTML pages.

 Here's the deal:

   - Most people will just have the file name. Normal procedures can be
 followed (first HTTP header, then filename and if content-type is
 text/plain and filename is .mp4 it's probably a misconfigured server and
 MP¤ should be assumed)

   - Some people will use query strings. This is usually serverside script
 pushing out the file. If there is a filename it can't be trusted. The
 content-type HTTP header can be trusted because people who are clever
 enough to pipe videos through a script are clever enough to have the
 script send the correct content-type header.

   - Feedburner already has the file extension correct (.mp4) in their
 enclosures. As long as the URL is seperated into approciate parts before
 parsing this is a non-issue.

 So what's the point in adding new arguments to the query string? As far as
 I can tell this thing was proposed because of a faulty script that didn't
 parse URLs for the filename properly. Call me a weirdo, but I prefer
 fixing that one script instead of forcing those of us who want to pipe
 stuff trough scripts to write URLs a certain way.

 And I'll shut up now. Promise.

 - Andreas

 On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:44:21 +0100, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:

  Here's my take... it would be great if mime-types solved the problem
  and if the enclosure type attribute was always present and always
  accurate. These things are not true in the wild world of RSS feeds.
  The best and most consistent indicator of a file type based on what
  people actually do is the file extension. It certainly would make
  things easier if the URL contained an extension at the end... even if
  it doesn't technically require it. Its not very hard to include
  type=.mp4 (or similar) at the end of a redirect URL since that URL is
  completely arbitrary anyway.
 
  That said, we're working on a solution to this problem that will be
  available in the next release of FireAnt for Windows (FireAnt for Mac
  handles it fine).
 
  -Josh
 
 
  On 3/17/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:35:35 +0100, Michael Sullivan
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
   it's like this tell me if including the media file name, as i
   suggest,
   breaks anything.  tell me if it makes a url worse.  tell me that it
   makes no
   sense to include the file name.  tell me something to convince me that
   this
   suggestion is illogical without telling me 'its not a problem so why
  fix
   it'.
 
  You're coming at this from the wrong angle.
 
  We have URLs and we have HTTP. Well-defined standards and they have been
  in use for almost 10 years. You want to change the way the URL work,
  which
  breaks backwards compatibility and *I* am supposed to give you more
  reasons not to go ahead? No, you should give *me* a good reason why
  redefining the meaning of the URL parts is a good idea. Why should we
  all
  spend time implementing this change when the current system has the same
  capabilities?
 
  Why is this change needed?
  How will it break old webpages?
  How will differences between the filename part of the URL and the
  filename
  given in the query string be handled?
 
  The change you're proposing is not simple at all. I still don't know
  *why*
  you want this change. Is it because you're having trouble determining
  mime
  type? In that case use an HTTP library that follows the same standard as
  everyone else have been using for the past 10 years - problem solved. No
  need for the rest of the world to change. In my last mail I listed the 3
  step process required to determine a mime type in today's web - it's
  not a
  hard thing to do. Or do you have some other reason for proposing the
  changes?
 
  --
  Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
  URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
  Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
 
 
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 



 --
 Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
 URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
 

Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Andreas Haugstrup
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 04:35:14 +0100, Michael Sullivan  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 i cant argue against that.  which is why i have'nt ;-)
 my focus is on if/how a masked url redirect should be laid out.
 if the url is a direct media location, i dont think its ludicrous to  
 suggest
 that the filename reside in the url instead of replacing it with a fake
 filename format etc.

But that's so contrary to the web. Why should you, I and everyone else  
spend time and resources trying to solve a problem that doesn't exists?

I don't hear any complaints that the URL  
http://www.solitude.dk/archives/20060310-1630/ doesn't contain a filename.  
Should I be using http://www.solitude.dk/showentry.php?id=20060310-1630  
instead so you can see the filename of the script? I don't get why you  
want to disallow clean URLs for media files.

URLs are arbitrary, that's fundemental to the web. If you want to change  
that you better have a damn good reason. I haven't heard that reason yet,  
since you're trying to solve a problem that don't exist.

-- 
Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Michael Sullivan



let's step back inside the box for a minute and not look at the big picture that is the web. let's look at media distribution specifically. a link to a video file would be better served if it were not in some cryptic url format that makes zero reference to that video file.
this being my opinion from my perception based on logic that I own. so I wont speak to the broad 'non-problem' you are speaking of. because i dont apply this opinion to any arbitrary url only urls to downloadable files beyond native web viewable files 
it's like this tell me if including the media file name, as i suggest, breaks anything. tell me if it makes a url worse. tell me that it makes no sense to include the file name. tell me something to convince me that this suggestion is illogical without telling me 'its not a problem so why fix it'. 
because there are many non-problems that are still illogical. again i'll reference iTunes xml channel image tag when RSS already provides it.thats a non-problem that is illogical. so, i am saying... fix the logic, not 'the non-problem'. 
need i point out again that i do understand that this is not a technical problem?should i state again that i know feedburner, in this example, is not doing anything technically wrong? i know. i know. it still lacks logic. that my complaint. agrue that point if you care to. because the rest of it, i wont argue (again to reiterate).
sullOn 3/17/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 04:35:14 +0100, Michael Sullivan[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i cant argue against that.which is why i have'nt ;-) my focus is on if/how a masked url redirect should be laid out.
 if the url is a direct media location, i dont think its ludicrous to suggest that the filename reside in the url instead of replacing it with a fake filename format etc.But that's so contrary to the web. Why should you, I and everyone else
spend time and resources trying to solve a problem that doesn't exists?I don't hear any complaints that the URLhttp://www.solitude.dk/archives/20060310-1630/
 doesn't contain a filename.Should I be using http://www.solitude.dk/showentry.php?id=20060310-1630instead so you can see the filename of the script? I don't get why you
want to disallow clean URLs for media files.URLs are arbitrary, that's fundemental to the web. If you want to changethat you better have a damn good reason. I haven't heard that reason yet,since you're trying to solve a problem that don't exist.
--Andreas Haugstrup PedersenURL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Andreas Haugstrup
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:35:35 +0100, Michael Sullivan  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 it's like this tell me if including the media file name, as i  
 suggest,
 breaks anything.  tell me if it makes a url worse.  tell me that it  
 makes no
 sense to include the file name.  tell me something to convince me that  
 this
 suggestion is illogical without telling me 'its not a problem so why fix
 it'.

You're coming at this from the wrong angle.

We have URLs and we have HTTP. Well-defined standards and they have been  
in use for almost 10 years. You want to change the way the URL work, which  
breaks backwards compatibility and *I* am supposed to give you more  
reasons not to go ahead? No, you should give *me* a good reason why  
redefining the meaning of the URL parts is a good idea. Why should we all  
spend time implementing this change when the current system has the same  
capabilities?

Why is this change needed?
How will it break old webpages?
How will differences between the filename part of the URL and the filename  
given in the query string be handled?

The change you're proposing is not simple at all. I still don't know *why*  
you want this change. Is it because you're having trouble determining mime  
type? In that case use an HTTP library that follows the same standard as  
everyone else have been using for the past 10 years - problem solved. No  
need for the rest of the world to change. In my last mail I listed the 3  
step process required to determine a mime type in today's web - it's not a  
hard thing to do. Or do you have some other reason for proposing the  
changes?

-- 
Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Joshua Kinberg
Here's my take... it would be great if mime-types solved the problem
and if the enclosure type attribute was always present and always
accurate. These things are not true in the wild world of RSS feeds.
The best and most consistent indicator of a file type based on what
people actually do is the file extension. It certainly would make
things easier if the URL contained an extension at the end... even if
it doesn't technically require it. Its not very hard to include
type=.mp4 (or similar) at the end of a redirect URL since that URL is
completely arbitrary anyway.

That said, we're working on a solution to this problem that will be
available in the next release of FireAnt for Windows (FireAnt for Mac
handles it fine).

-Josh


On 3/17/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:35:35 +0100, Michael Sullivan
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  it's like this tell me if including the media file name, as i
  suggest,
  breaks anything.  tell me if it makes a url worse.  tell me that it
  makes no
  sense to include the file name.  tell me something to convince me that
  this
  suggestion is illogical without telling me 'its not a problem so why fix
  it'.

 You're coming at this from the wrong angle.

 We have URLs and we have HTTP. Well-defined standards and they have been
 in use for almost 10 years. You want to change the way the URL work, which
 breaks backwards compatibility and *I* am supposed to give you more
 reasons not to go ahead? No, you should give *me* a good reason why
 redefining the meaning of the URL parts is a good idea. Why should we all
 spend time implementing this change when the current system has the same
 capabilities?

 Why is this change needed?
 How will it break old webpages?
 How will differences between the filename part of the URL and the filename
 given in the query string be handled?

 The change you're proposing is not simple at all. I still don't know *why*
 you want this change. Is it because you're having trouble determining mime
 type? In that case use an HTTP library that follows the same standard as
 everyone else have been using for the past 10 years - problem solved. No
 need for the rest of the world to change. In my last mail I listed the 3
 step process required to determine a mime type in today's web - it's not a
 hard thing to do. Or do you have some other reason for proposing the
 changes?

 --
 Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
 URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
 Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.



 Yahoo! Groups Links









 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Michael Sullivan



let's just call it a pet peeve of mine.i'm not going to try and convince anyone to structure their urls in a specific way, but I have stated my preference which I think offers more clarity and logic without cryptic format that is more complicated to decipher (as you cant just look at the link and know the filename).
all that aside, i will be implementing the more fail-safe http approach to mime detection to precede my current checks which are currently dependent on the RSS item enclosure mime type and the file extension. 
thanks for sending my that reference library.and thanks for sharing your opinion.sullOn 3/17/06, Andreas Haugstrup 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:35:35 +0100, Michael Sullivan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it's like this tell me if including the media file name, as i suggest, breaks anything.tell me if it makes a url worse.tell me that it
 makes no sense to include the file name.tell me something to convince me that this suggestion is illogical without telling me 'its not a problem so why fix it'.You're coming at this from the wrong angle.
We have URLs and we have HTTP. Well-defined standards and they have beenin use for almost 10 years. You want to change the way the URL work, whichbreaks backwards compatibility and *I* am supposed to give you more
reasons not to go ahead? No, you should give *me* a good reason whyredefining the meaning of the URL parts is a good idea. Why should we allspend time implementing this change when the current system has the same
capabilities?Why is this change needed?How will it break old webpages?How will differences between the filename part of the URL and the filenamegiven in the query string be handled?The change you're proposing is not simple at all. I still don't know *why*
you want this change. Is it because you're having trouble determining mimetype? In that case use an HTTP library that follows the same standard aseveryone else have been using for the past 10 years - problem solved. No
need for the rest of the world to change. In my last mail I listed the 3step process required to determine a mime type in today's web - it's not ahard thing to do. Or do you have some other reason for proposing the
changes?--Andreas Haugstrup PedersenURL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Pete Prodoehl
Michael Sullivan wrote:
 let's just call it a pet peeve of mine.
 i'm not going to try and convince anyone to structure their urls in a
 specific way, but I have stated my preference which I think offers more
 clarity and logic without cryptic format that is more complicated to
 decipher (as you cant just look at the link and know the filename).

You can look at the URL, and *think* you know the file type...

What's to prevent:

   http://example.com/?name=footype=mov

 From being something else, like say, an .exe file perhaps?

Pete

-- 
http://tinkernet.org/
videoblog for the future...




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Joshua Kinberg
That could be the case with any URL, whether the file extension is
present or not, or whether the mime-type is correct or not.

-Josh


On 3/17/06, Pete Prodoehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Michael Sullivan wrote:
  let's just call it a pet peeve of mine.
  i'm not going to try and convince anyone to structure their urls in a
  specific way, but I have stated my preference which I think offers more
  clarity and logic without cryptic format that is more complicated to
  decipher (as you cant just look at the link and know the filename).

 You can look at the URL, and *think* you know the file type...

 What's to prevent:

http://example.com/?name=footype=mov

  From being something else, like say, an .exe file perhaps?

 Pete

 --
 http://tinkernet.org/
 videoblog for the future...





 Yahoo! Groups Links









 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Michael Sullivan



c'mon man... ;-)i'm talking within the bounds of trust and generalities here.tinkernet.org could be a link to an .exe. On 3/17/06, 
Pete Prodoehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Sullivan wrote: let's just call it a pet peeve of mine. i'm not going to try and convince anyone to structure their urls in a specific way, but I have stated my preference which I think offers more
 clarity and logic without cryptic format that is more complicated to decipher (as you cant just look at the link and know the filename).You can look at the URL, and *think* you know the file type...
What's to prevent: http://example.com/?name=footype=mov From being something else, like say, an .exe file perhaps?Pete
--http://tinkernet.org/videoblog for the future...Yahoo! Groups Links* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sull
http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Pete Prodoehl
Michael Sullivan wrote:
 c'mon man...
 ;-)
 
 i'm talking within the bounds of trust and generalities here.
 tinkernet.org could be a link to an .exe.

Gimme 5 minutes... just kidding.

Ok, I was playing devil's advocate a bit.

I've learned from years of dealing with this stuff:

You can't trust the file extension.
You can't trust the mime-type.

Sometimes it's a mis-configured server, sometimes it's a clueless user, 
sometimes is malicious. (Usually the first two.)

Pete

-- 
http://tinkernet.org/
videoblog for the future...




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-17 Thread Andreas Haugstrup
Okay, but what does appending the file type as a query string help? As far  
as I can tell it only break stuff because people use your pop-up link  
generator which has links like URL:  
http://www.michaelverdi.com/popup.php?url=http://michaelverdi.com/video/dresscode.mov
  
 that are not media links, but links to HTML pages.

Here's the deal:

  - Most people will just have the file name. Normal procedures can be  
followed (first HTTP header, then filename and if content-type is  
text/plain and filename is .mp4 it's probably a misconfigured server and  
MP¤ should be assumed)

  - Some people will use query strings. This is usually serverside script  
pushing out the file. If there is a filename it can't be trusted. The  
content-type HTTP header can be trusted because people who are clever  
enough to pipe videos through a script are clever enough to have the  
script send the correct content-type header.

  - Feedburner already has the file extension correct (.mp4) in their  
enclosures. As long as the URL is seperated into approciate parts before  
parsing this is a non-issue.

So what's the point in adding new arguments to the query string? As far as  
I can tell this thing was proposed because of a faulty script that didn't  
parse URLs for the filename properly. Call me a weirdo, but I prefer  
fixing that one script instead of forcing those of us who want to pipe  
stuff trough scripts to write URLs a certain way.

And I'll shut up now. Promise.

- Andreas

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:44:21 +0100, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
wrote:

 Here's my take... it would be great if mime-types solved the problem
 and if the enclosure type attribute was always present and always
 accurate. These things are not true in the wild world of RSS feeds.
 The best and most consistent indicator of a file type based on what
 people actually do is the file extension. It certainly would make
 things easier if the URL contained an extension at the end... even if
 it doesn't technically require it. Its not very hard to include
 type=.mp4 (or similar) at the end of a redirect URL since that URL is
 completely arbitrary anyway.

 That said, we're working on a solution to this problem that will be
 available in the next release of FireAnt for Windows (FireAnt for Mac
 handles it fine).

 -Josh


 On 3/17/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:35:35 +0100, Michael Sullivan
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  it's like this tell me if including the media file name, as i
  suggest,
  breaks anything.  tell me if it makes a url worse.  tell me that it
  makes no
  sense to include the file name.  tell me something to convince me that
  this
  suggestion is illogical without telling me 'its not a problem so why  
 fix
  it'.

 You're coming at this from the wrong angle.

 We have URLs and we have HTTP. Well-defined standards and they have been
 in use for almost 10 years. You want to change the way the URL work,  
 which
 breaks backwards compatibility and *I* am supposed to give you more
 reasons not to go ahead? No, you should give *me* a good reason why
 redefining the meaning of the URL parts is a good idea. Why should we  
 all
 spend time implementing this change when the current system has the same
 capabilities?

 Why is this change needed?
 How will it break old webpages?
 How will differences between the filename part of the URL and the  
 filename
 given in the query string be handled?

 The change you're proposing is not simple at all. I still don't know  
 *why*
 you want this change. Is it because you're having trouble determining  
 mime
 type? In that case use an HTTP library that follows the same standard as
 everyone else have been using for the past 10 years - problem solved. No
 need for the rest of the world to change. In my last mail I listed the 3
 step process required to determine a mime type in today's web - it's  
 not a
 hard thing to do. Or do you have some other reason for proposing the
 changes?

 --
 Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
 URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
 Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.



 Yahoo! Groups Links









 Yahoo! Groups Links







-- 
Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 





[videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



What option in feedburner causes their to be id #s attached to the end of a media filename? Is it the Total Stats Pro tracking of media enclosures?ie. 
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
via:http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilmsThis feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types in feeds are not accurate). 
Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible (such as ending the url with .ext)? This is annoying and even though not technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this. I dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats. Once mime types are much more accurate, that's obviously the most proper way to detect a file format. but the reality is, file extensions hold weight rigth now. Unless someone can enlighten me to another approach. 
Worse case, i write code to work with these feedburner urls. But prefer to have feedburner do the mod.thanks,sull-- Sull
http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Andreas Haugstrup
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 ie. http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
 via:
 http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms

 This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses
 typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types  
 in
 feeds are not accurate).

 Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible  
 (such
 as ending the url with .ext)?  This is annoying and even though not
 technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this
 issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.  I
 dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.

The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string.
Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because it  
doesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points  
to the original video URL.

So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are even  
sending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't work  
with these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting  
up limitations like video files must have a file extension and you  
cannot use redirects are more than a little silly.

This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these  
special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP  
correctly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query string  
before checking for file extension) there would be no problems.

-- 
Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 





Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



true.but it would be so simple if redirect urls with parameters just added a file extension parameter at the end as well. that would be a friendlier approach. RSS aggregation of item enclosures were intended to be the actual direct url to media file. But, I suppose you cannot get around these redirects and url params on the enclosures for these tracking purposes and whatever else. 
Problem also is, i've seen redirect urls that do not hold proper header data and no reference to filename is url. This is just yet another standards issue. I did note that feedburner was not technically doing anything 'wrong' but its definately an annoyance one resolvable by simply adding the filename with extension at the end of the url string. why is that not less acceptable? 
Regardless, I will use http check and hope that most cases actually have proper header info on the file. no guarantees there but at least feedburner is doing it right.   sull
On 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ie. http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
 via: http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
 in feeds are not accurate). Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible (such as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not
 technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string.Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because itdoesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
to the original video URL.So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are evensending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't workwith these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
up limitations like video files must have a file extension and youcannot use redirects are more than a little silly.This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTPcorrectly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query stringbefore checking for file extension) there would be no problems.
--Andreas Haugstrup PedersenURL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Joshua Kinberg
Could you give me a RSS URL that uses this?
I have never encountered this issue here. We should still be able to
download the files using that URL convention.

-Josh


On 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  ie. http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
  via:
  http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms
 
  This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses
  typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
  in
  feeds are not accurate).
 
  Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible
  (such
  as ending the url with .ext)?  This is annoying and even though not
  technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this
  issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.  I
  dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.

 The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string.
 Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because it
 doesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
 to the original video URL.

 So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are even
 sending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't work
 with these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
 up limitations like video files must have a file extension and you
 cannot use redirects are more than a little silly.

 This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
 special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP
 correctly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query string
 before checking for file extension) there would be no problems.

 --
 Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
 URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
 Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.



 Yahoo! Groups Links










 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread David Meade



I was concerned about letting feedburner alter my links, but in the end I agree with Andreas. The file urls still end with the proper extensions. There is simply a query string on the url as well.I dont pretent to know whatever language it is your coding in, but in the languages I've used it's pretty easy to get the requested file name and extension from a url even if there are a bunch of query string variables at the end. Is that an option? Or, you could just check the extension after following any redirects. (although ideally you would not consider query strings as part of the file name even for a 200 http response).
- Dave-- http://www.DavidMeade.com
On 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP
correctly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query stringbefore checking for file extension) there would be no problems.






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25is a redirect for:
http://www.cinemabank.co.uk/spainful/MP4/fashion05POD.mp4what would be wrong with this format instead?http://feeds.feedburner.com/
spainfulfilms?d=25file=fashion05POD.mp4
On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
true.but it would be so simple if redirect urls with parameters just added a file extension parameter at the end as well. that would be a friendlier approach. RSS aggregation of item enclosures were intended to be the actual direct url to media file. But, I suppose you cannot get around these redirects and url params on the enclosures for these tracking purposes and whatever else. 
Problem also is, i've seen redirect urls that do not hold proper header data and no reference to filename is url. This is just yet another standards issue. I did note that feedburner was not technically doing anything 'wrong' but its definately an annoyance one resolvable by simply adding the filename with extension at the end of the url string. why is that not less acceptable? 
Regardless, I will use http check and hope that most cases actually have proper header info on the file. no guarantees there but at least feedburner is doing it right.   sull

On 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ie. 
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
 via: http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses
 typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
 in feeds are not accurate). Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible (such as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not

 technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string.Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because itdoesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
to the original video URL.So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are evensending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't workwith these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
up limitations like video files must have a file extension and youcannot use redirects are more than a little silly.This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTPcorrectly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query stringbefore checking for file extension) there would be no problems.

--Andreas Haugstrup PedersenURL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sull
http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org


-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Joshua Kinberg



Just to reiterate... I believe these URLs work as expected in FireAnt. Please send me an RSS feed that uses this option in Feedburner so I can double check. Thanks.-JoshOn 3/16/06, 
Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



true.but it would be so simple if redirect urls with parameters just added a file extension parameter at the end as well. that would be a friendlier approach. RSS aggregation of item enclosures were intended to be the actual direct url to media file. But, I suppose you cannot get around these redirects and url params on the enclosures for these tracking purposes and whatever else. 
Problem also is, i've seen redirect urls that do not hold proper header data and no reference to filename is url. This is just yet another standards issue. I did note that feedburner was not technically doing anything 'wrong' but its definately an annoyance one resolvable by simply adding the filename with extension at the end of the url string. why is that not less acceptable? 
Regardless, I will use http check and hope that most cases actually have proper header info on the file. no guarantees there but at least feedburner is doing it right.   sull

On 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ie. 
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
 via: http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses
 typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
 in feeds are not accurate). Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible (such as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not

 technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string.Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because itdoesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
to the original video URL.So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are evensending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't workwith these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
up limitations like video files must have a file extension and youcannot use redirects are more than a little silly.This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTPcorrectly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query stringbefore checking for file extension) there would be no problems.

--Andreas Haugstrup PedersenURL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sull
http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  


Individual
  
  

Fireant
  
  

Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group videoblogging on the web.

  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.



  














  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



my problem is just because i technically can figure out the media format by taking the scenic route, why shouldnt a redirect url to a media file frickn include the media file name in it as well and make life easier for everyone. no? 
to me, this url is silly. it includes a fake filename based on the channel name and file extension. yes, more silly than my expectation of such urls following a logical standard. i dont care if i can technically 'handle' a redirect or reading header info to load a proper media player. i shouldnt have to care if other services are not caring about preserving logic in an enclosure url. whats the difference? 
this url is stupid and self serving.http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
this url is logical and cross-compatible
http://www.cinemabank.co.uk/spainful/MP4/fashion05POD.mp4let's argue that point, and put the technical feasibility to the side for now.anyone have an opinion on this?sull
On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25is a redirect for:

http://www.cinemabank.co.uk/spainful/MP4/fashion05POD.mp4what would be wrong with this format instead?
http://feeds.feedburner.com/
spainfulfilms?d=25file=fashion05POD.mp4
On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
true.but it would be so simple if redirect urls with parameters just added a file extension parameter at the end as well. that would be a friendlier approach. RSS aggregation of item enclosures were intended to be the actual direct url to media file. But, I suppose you cannot get around these redirects and url params on the enclosures for these tracking purposes and whatever else. 
Problem also is, i've seen redirect urls that do not hold proper header data and no reference to filename is url. This is just yet another standards issue. I did note that feedburner was not technically doing anything 'wrong' but its definately an annoyance one resolvable by simply adding the filename with extension at the end of the url string. why is that not less acceptable? 
Regardless, I will use http check and hope that most cases actually have proper header info on the file. no guarantees there but at least feedburner is doing it right.   sull


On 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ie. 
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
 via: http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses
 typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
 in feeds are not accurate). Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible (such as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not

 technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string.Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because itdoesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
to the original video URL.So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are evensending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't workwith these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
up limitations like video files must have a file extension and youcannot use redirects are more than a little silly.This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTPcorrectly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query stringbefore checking for file extension) there would be no problems.


--Andreas Haugstrup PedersenURL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sull

http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org


-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com 
http://SpreadTheMedia.org

-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



edit:this url is logical and cross-compatible

http://feeds.feedburner.com/
spainfulfilms?d=25file=fashion05POD.mp4
On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
my problem is just because i technically can figure out the media format by taking the scenic route, why shouldnt a redirect url to a media file frickn include the media file name in it as well and make life easier for everyone. no? 
to me, this url is silly. it includes a fake filename based on the channel name and file extension. yes, more silly than my expectation of such urls following a logical standard. i dont care if i can technically 'handle' a redirect or reading header info to load a proper media player. i shouldnt have to care if other services are not caring about preserving logic in an enclosure url. whats the difference? 
this url is stupid and self serving.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
this url is logical and cross-compatible

http://www.cinemabank.co.uk/spainful/MP4/fashion05POD.mp4let's argue that point, and put the technical feasibility to the side for now.anyone have an opinion on this?
sull
On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25is a redirect for:


http://www.cinemabank.co.uk/spainful/MP4/fashion05POD.mp4what would be wrong with this format instead?

http://feeds.feedburner.com/
spainfulfilms?d=25file=fashion05POD.mp4
On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan 

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
true.but it would be so simple if redirect urls with parameters just added a file extension parameter at the end as well. that would be a friendlier approach. RSS aggregation of item enclosures were intended to be the actual direct url to media file. But, I suppose you cannot get around these redirects and url params on the enclosures for these tracking purposes and whatever else. 
Problem also is, i've seen redirect urls that do not hold proper header data and no reference to filename is url. This is just yet another standards issue. I did note that feedburner was not technically doing anything 'wrong' but its definately an annoyance one resolvable by simply adding the filename with extension at the end of the url string. why is that not less acceptable? 
Regardless, I will use http check and hope that most cases actually have proper header info on the file. no guarantees there but at least feedburner is doing it right.   sull



On 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ie. 
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
 via: http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses
 typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
 in feeds are not accurate). Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible (such as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not

 technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string.Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because itdoesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
to the original video URL.So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are evensending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't workwith these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
up limitations like video files must have a file extension and youcannot use redirects are more than a little silly.This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTPcorrectly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query stringbefore checking for file extension) there would be no problems.



--Andreas Haugstrup PedersenURL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sull


http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org


-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com 

http://SpreadTheMedia.org

-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com 
http://SpreadTheMedia.org

-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe 

Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



josh, i did in my message. i have been referring to this example:http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms
On 3/16/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you give me a RSS URL that uses this?I have never encountered this issue here. We should still be able todownload the files using that URL convention.-JoshOn 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  ie. http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25  via:  
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms   This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses  typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
  in  feeds are not accurate).   Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible  (such  as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not
  technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this  issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I  dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
 The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string. Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because it doesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
 to the original video URL. So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are even sending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't work with these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
 up limitations like video files must have a file extension and you cannot use redirects are more than a little silly. This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
 special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP correctly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query string before checking for file extension) there would be no problems.
 -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/  Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
 Yahoo! Groups LinksYahoo! Groups Links* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sull
http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



David,I know, you are correct. I am not going to argue that frome a technical point of view, these urls can be handled by media aggreators. I want to debate now whether services like feedburner or any other that alters actual enclosure urls should follow some sort of standard or not.
What do you think? On 3/16/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



I was concerned about letting feedburner alter my links, but in the end I agree with Andreas. The file urls still end with the proper extensions. There is simply a query string on the url as well.I dont pretent to know whatever language it is your coding in, but in the languages I've used it's pretty easy to get the requested file name and extension from a url even if there are a bunch of query string variables at the end. Is that an option? Or, you could just check the extension after following any redirects. (although ideally you would not consider query strings as part of the file name even for a 200 http response).
- Dave-- http://www.DavidMeade.com

On 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP
correctly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query stringbefore checking for file extension) there would be no problems.






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  


Individual
  
  

Fireant
  
  

Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group videoblogging on the web.

  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.



  








-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread David Meade



On 3/16/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Could you give me a RSS URL that uses this?
I have never encountered this issue here. We should still be able todownload the files using that URL convention.My feed recently updated to this sytesm:
http://www.davidmeade.com/feedOn 3/16/06, 
Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I did note that feedburner was not technically doing anything 'wrong'
but its definately an annoyance one resolvable by simply adding the
filename with extension at the end of the url string. why is that not
less acceptable? Actually ideally both would happen so that all parties are trying to be as widely useable as possible. I guess my thought is having feedburner do this as a fix is less acceptable because it only 'fixes' one feed source (that wasnt really doing anything wrong anyway) ... there are bound to be others and more and more and more in the future. Ideally, aggrigators would correctly recognize what part of the url is a filename and what part is a query string (and correctly follow redirects before bothering with any of that)






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread David Meade



Well, on one hand ... If I were feedburner I probably would have put filename=origional_file.mov at the end. Just make sure they werent going to break any systems already in place. I agree with you there, it seems a simple safe guard for backward compatability.
On the other hand ... They're feed makers not really feed aggregators ... It's possible it just never occured to them that some systems might not be acting on the acrual filename but rather a larger portion of the url. 
I'm not sure the url system they've used is any more 'silly' than it is to expect them to tack on a query string variable they dont actually need to recieve in order to provide the media.All that being said, yeah I think it would be great if some standard could be agreed upon such that enclosure redirects should always end with the filename ... why not? Some may chose to use an ending variable such as filename=origional_file.ext or some might use a more fancy redirect like 
http://redirecting-service.com/user/filename.ext ... Dont see how such a standard could be a bad thing.Is this something that microformats might be able to provide?
- DaveOn 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



David,I know, you are correct. I am not going to argue that frome a technical point of view, these urls can be handled by media aggreators. I want to debate now whether services like feedburner or any other that alters actual enclosure urls should follow some sort of standard or not.
What do you think? -- http://www.DavidMeade.com





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



I agree with your response.To me, it's not about knowing whether or not I can problem solve such things.Its about Why should I have to?Same applies to iTunes xml, in particular the channel image reference.
If developers constantly say... oh well, i guess i should adapt to the latest concoction of whatever then the shit never ends. if standards are held up, respected and created when logic demands it, then at the end of the day, things are just better!
aye.sullOn 3/16/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



Well, on one hand ... If I were feedburner I probably would have put filename=origional_file.mov at the end. Just make sure they werent going to break any systems already in place. I agree with you there, it seems a simple safe guard for backward compatability.
On the other hand ... They're feed makers not really feed aggregators ... It's possible it just never occured to them that some systems might not be acting on the acrual filename but rather a larger portion of the url. 
I'm not sure the url system they've used is any more 'silly' than it is to expect them to tack on a query string variable they dont actually need to recieve in order to provide the media.All that being said, yeah I think it would be great if some standard could be agreed upon such that enclosure redirects should always end with the filename ... why not? Some may chose to use an ending variable such as filename=origional_file.ext or some might use a more fancy redirect like 
http://redirecting-service.com/user/filename.ext ... Dont see how such a standard could be a bad thing.
Is this something that microformats might be able to provide?
- DaveOn 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



David,I know, you are correct. I am not going to argue that frome a technical point of view, these urls can be handled by media aggreators. I want to debate now whether services like feedburner or any other that alters actual enclosure urls should follow some sort of standard or not.
What do you think? -- 
http://www.DavidMeade.com





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  


Individual
  
  

Fireant
  
  

Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group videoblogging on the web.

  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.



  








-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Joshua Kinberg
 this url is logical and cross-compatible
   http://feeds.feedburner.com/ spainfulfilms?d=25file=fashion05POD.mp4

I agree with this. If the file is not a real file but rather a
redirect then it shouldn't have a file extension like .mp4.

Not to mention the current way Feedburner has it set up, it looks like
each enclosure is actually the same file (i.e. spainfulfilems.mp4). If
the URL were like the one above then there would be a lot less
confusion IMHO.

-Josh


On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

edit:



 this url is logical and cross-compatible
   http://feeds.feedburner.com/ spainfulfilms?d=25file=fashion05POD.mp4




 On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  my problem is
  just because i technically can figure out the media format by taking the 
  scenic route, why shouldnt a redirect url to a media file frickn include 
  the media file name in it as well and make life easier for everyone.  no?
  to me, this url is silly.  it includes a fake filename based on the channel 
  name and file extension.  yes, more silly than my expectation of such urls 
  following a logical standard.  i dont care if i can technically 'handle' a 
  redirect or reading header info to load a proper media player. i 
  shouldnt have to care if other services are not caring about preserving 
  logic in an enclosure url.  whats the difference?
 
  this url is stupid and self serving.
 
 
   http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
 
 
  this url is logical and cross-compatible
 
 
http://www.cinemabank.co.uk/spainful/MP4/fashion05POD.mp4
 
 
  let's argue that point, and put the technical feasibility to the side for 
  now.
 
  anyone have an opinion on this?
 
  sull
 
 
 
   On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
  
  
  
 http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
  
   is a redirect for:
  http://www.cinemabank.co.uk/spainful/MP4/fashion05POD.mp4
  
   what would be wrong with this format instead?
  
 http://feeds.feedburner.com/ spainfulfilms?d=25file=fashion05POD.mp4
  
  
  
  
   On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan   [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   
true.
but it would be so simple if redirect urls with parameters just added a 
file extension parameter at the end as well. that would be a friendlier 
approach.
RSS aggregation of item enclosures were intended to be the actual 
direct url to media file.  But, I suppose you cannot get around these 
redirects and url params on the enclosures for these tracking 
purposes and whatever else.
   
Problem also is, i've seen redirect urls that do not hold proper header 
data and no reference to filename is url. This is just yet another 
standards issue.
   
I did note that feedburner was not technically doing anything 'wrong' 
but its definately an annoyance one resolvable by simply adding the 
filename with extension at the end of the url string.  why is that not 
less acceptable?
   
Regardless, I will use http check and hope that most cases actually 
have proper header info on the file.  no guarantees there but at least 
feedburner is doing it right.
   
sull
   
   
   
   
 On 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  ie.  http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25
  via:
  http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms
 
  This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently 
  uses
  typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime 
  types
  in
  feeds are not accurate).
 
  Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more 
  cross-compatible
  (such
  as ending the url with .ext)?  This is annoying and even though not
   technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have 
 taken this
  issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like 
  this.  I
  dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url 
  formats.

 The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query 
 string.
 Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because it
 doesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that 
 points
 to the original video URL.

 So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are even
 sending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't 
 work
 with these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. 
 Setting
 up limitations like video files must have a file extension and you
 cannot use redirects are more than a little silly.

 This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
 special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP
 correctly 

Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



Josh, i tried it in version 1.0.1.72error message was:fireant was unable to recognize any media files in this enclosure etc...
On 3/16/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you give me a RSS URL that uses this?I have never encountered this issue here. We should still be able todownload the files using that URL convention.-JoshOn 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  ie. http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25  via:  
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms   This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses  typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
  in  feeds are not accurate).   Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible  (such  as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not
  technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this  issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I  dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
 The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string. Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because it doesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
 to the original video URL. So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are even sending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't work with these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
 up limitations like video files must have a file extension and you cannot use redirects are more than a little silly. This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
 special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP correctly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query string before checking for file extension) there would be no problems.
 -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/  Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
 Yahoo! Groups LinksYahoo! Groups Links* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/-- Sull
http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



Ideally, aggrigators would correctly recognize what part of the url is
a filename and what part is a query string (and correctly follow
redirects before bothering with any of that)right, that would be ideal but it can get messy. and if i wanted to display the filename by pulling it out of such a url, in the feedburner case... the filename is fake (
channelname.ext). anyway, i just added quick fix based on mime-type from the RSS.which is another chaotic mess!! totally not reliable.ie. to initiate Quicktime... i'm checking for one of the following:
video/quicktime video/mov video/mp4v video/mp4 video/x-mp4 video/x-m4v video/m4v video/3gpp2 
video/3gpp video/mpeg video/avithis is what I use in my vodcast playlist generator which uses SMIL/QT.am I missing any :) where is the best master list of media mime types?
At least feeds like spainful films now work -http://vlogdir.com/permalink/1663but i'll try to get http library implemented. know of any good php for this? 
sullOn 3/16/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



On 3/16/06, Joshua Kinberg 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Could you give me a RSS URL that uses this?
I have never encountered this issue here. We should still be able todownload the files using that URL convention.My feed recently updated to this sytesm:

http://www.davidmeade.com/feed
On 3/16/06, 
Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did note that feedburner was not technically doing anything 'wrong'
but its definately an annoyance one resolvable by simply adding the
filename with extension at the end of the url string. why is that not
less acceptable? Actually ideally both would happen so that all parties are trying to be as widely useable as possible. I guess my thought is having feedburner do this as a fix is less acceptable because it only 'fixes' one feed source (that wasnt really doing anything wrong anyway) ... there are bound to be others and more and more and more in the future. Ideally, aggrigators would correctly recognize what part of the url is a filename and what part is a query string (and correctly follow redirects before bothering with any of that)






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  


Individual
  
  

Fireant
  
  

Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group videoblogging on the web.

  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.



  








-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Joshua Kinberg



You're correct. I just tried this feed and got the same error you describe. I thought we were handling this correctly, but I guess we are not. I'll have to add this to the list and hopefully it will be available for the next release in a few weeks.
But, as you suggested, I know URLs that end with a query like type=.mp4 work like a charm.-JoshOn 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



Josh, i tried it in version 1.0.1.72error message was:fireant was unable to recognize any media files in this enclosure etc...

On 3/16/06, Joshua Kinberg 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Could you give me a RSS URL that uses this?I have never encountered this issue here. We should still be able todownload the files using that URL convention.-JoshOn 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  ie. http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25  via:
  
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms   This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses  typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
  in  feeds are not accurate).   Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible  (such  as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not
  technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this  issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I  dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
 The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string. Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because it doesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
 to the original video URL. So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are even sending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't work with these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
 up limitations like video files must have a file extension and you cannot use redirects are more than a little silly. This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
 special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP correctly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query string before checking for file extension) there would be no problems.
 -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/  Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.

 Yahoo! Groups LinksYahoo! Groups Links* To visit your group on the web, go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
-- Sull
http://vlogdir.com 
http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  


Individual
  
  

Fireant
  
  

Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group videoblogging on the web.

  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.



  














  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Michael Sullivan



Actually Josh it does download. i saw the error message, but didnt click 'ok' to 'download anyway'. disregard.On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh, i tried it in version 1.0.1.72error message was:fireant was unable to recognize any media files in this enclosure etc...

On 3/16/06, Joshua Kinberg 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Could you give me a RSS URL that uses this?I have never encountered this issue here. We should still be able todownload the files using that URL convention.-JoshOn 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  ie. http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25  via:
  
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms   This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses  typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
  in  feeds are not accurate).   Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible  (such  as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not
  technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this  issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I  dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
 The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string. Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because it doesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
 to the original video URL. So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are even sending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't work with these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
 up limitations like video files must have a file extension and you cannot use redirects are more than a little silly. This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
 special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP correctly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query string before checking for file extension) there would be no problems.
 -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/  Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.

 Yahoo! Groups LinksYahoo! Groups Links* To visit your group on the web, go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
-- Sull
http://vlogdir.com 
http://SpreadTheMedia.org

-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Joshua Kinberg



yes and no... it downloads if you click ok to download anyway, but then it doesn't play once download has completed. Its definitely an issue on our end.-Josh
On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



Actually Josh it does download. i saw the error message, but didnt click 'ok' to 'download anyway'. disregard.
On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Josh, i tried it in version 1.0.1.72error message was:fireant was unable to recognize any media files in this enclosure etc...

On 3/16/06, Joshua Kinberg 

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Could you give me a RSS URL that uses this?I have never encountered this issue here. We should still be able todownload the files using that URL convention.-JoshOn 3/16/06, Andreas Haugstrup 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:17:15 +0100, Michael Sullivan 

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  ie. http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms.mp4?d=25  via:
  
http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms   This feed doesnt work in FireAnt or any aggregator that currently uses  typical file extention detection of media format (since often mime types
  in  feeds are not accurate).   Should'nt we get feedburner to modify it so its more cross-compatible  (such  as ending the url with .ext)?This is annoying and even though not
  technically wrong to do on feedburner's part, they should have taken this  issue into consideration before breaking direct media urls like this.I  dont want to write new code to handle 'special' direct media url formats.
 The file name still has a .mp4 extenstion. The ?id=25 is the query string. Without knowing for sure I'm guessing that FireANT fails because it doesn't follow redirects (the URL responds with a 302 header that points
 to the original video URL. So Feedburner has a correct filename ending in .mp4 and they are even sending the correct mime type (video/mp4). If an aggregator doesn't work with these URLs the aggregator needs to use a proper HTTP library. Setting
 up limitations like video files must have a file extension and you cannot use redirects are more than a little silly. This isn't a case of having to write special software to handle these
 special URLs. These are normal URLs and if the software was using HTTP correctly (following redirects, breaking apart filename from query string before checking for file extension) there would be no problems.
 -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/  Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.

 Yahoo! Groups LinksYahoo! Groups Links* To visit your group on the web, go to:


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

-- Sull
http://vlogdir.com 

http://SpreadTheMedia.org

-- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com 
http://SpreadTheMedia.org





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  


Individual
  
  

Fireant
  
  

Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group videoblogging on the web.

  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.



  














  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Pete Prodoehl
Joshua Kinberg wrote:
 Just to reiterate... I believe these URLs work as expected in FireAnt.
 Please send me an RSS feed that uses this option in Feedburner so I can
 double check. Thanks.

My feed has always been fine:

http://tinkernet.org/feed/

has enclosure links like so:

http://tinkernet.org/enclose.cgi/http://www.archive.org/download/Kid_Gymnastics/20060223kidgymnastics.mov

use curl -I on that and you get:

HTTP/1.1 302 Found
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:53:18 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.31 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.8.20 OpenSSL/0.9.7d mod_perl/1.29 
PHP/4.4.1
Location: 
http://www.archive.org/download/Kid_Gymnastics/20060223kidgymnastics.mov
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1

use curl -I on the Location and you get:

HTTP/1.1 302 Found
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:53:25 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.33 (Debian GNU/Linux) PHP/5.0.4-0.4
X-Powered-By: PHP/5.0.4-0.4
Location: 
http://ia300113.us.archive.org/2/items/Kid_Gymnastics/20060223kidgymnastics.mov
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1

which sends you the Location of the actual file, which you can then 
request... use curl -I on the Location and you get:

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:55:32 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.33 (Debian GNU/Linux) PHP/5.0.4-0.7
Last-Modified: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 11:37:25 GMT
ETag: ee-e7823-43fd9e75
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 948259
Content-Type: video/quicktime

So FireAnt (and any other http client that does the right thing) should 
always get it...

I could have just as easily used a URL like:

http://tinkernet.org/enclose.cgi/1746

but I like my URLs ;)

they have the added side-effect of logging each request on my own 
server, even though the file is stored elsewhere.


Pete

-- 
http://tinkernet.org/
videoblog for the future...





 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread David Meade



On 3/16/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
but i'll try to get http library implemented. know of any good php for this? 
forgive me if this isn't what you were asking for ... but here's some php anyway :-Pcheck out: 
http://davidmeade.com/resources/enclosure_test.php
and put in one of the new feedburner urls.-- http://www.DavidMeade.com






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Individual
  
  
Fireant
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  









Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Andreas Haugstrup
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:11:00 +0100, Michael Sullivan  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 this url is logical and cross-compatible
 http://feeds.feedburner.com/
 spainfulfilms?id=25file=fashion05POD.mp4

Is it? This is an identical URL:

http://feeds.feedburner.com/spainfulfilms?file=fashion05POD.mp4id=25

Should it always be file or should other values be permitted? What are  
the security implications of identifying a filename via the query string?

This is a classic case of if it ain't broke, don't fix it. There *is* a  
standard handling these issues. It's called HTTP, and it's very stable and  
very well supported. If your library can't handle basic HTTP features like  
302 headers and seperating the filename from the query string, you need to  
get a new library.

If you want to find the type of file behind a URL it's an easy three step  
process:

  1. Resolve all redirects (your library should do this for you).
  2. Check the Content-type header for a mime type. If this is a known  
video format, great if not...
  3. Check the file name. If it ends in .mp4, .m4v or another known  
troublemaker *and* the content-type is set to text/plain assume that  
it's an mp4. If not assume you're recieving text/plain.

Not rocket science. If your HTTP library is faulty then enclosures will be  
the least of your worries. Fix your library instead of asking the whole  
wide world to adopt some arbitrary format. There are issues with HTTP, but  
this ain't one of them.

-- 
Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 





Re: [videoblogging] feedburner media urls with ?d=

2006-03-16 Thread Andreas Haugstrup
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:32:42 +0100, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
wrote:

 Well, on one hand ...
 If I were feedburner I probably would have put
 filename=origional_file.mov at the end. Just make sure they werent  
 going to
 break any systems already in place.  I agree with you there, it seems a
 simple safe guard for backward compatability.

It's not a case of backwards compatability. If file names aren't being  
resolved it's a bug that should be fixed asap. Relying on a query string  
value corrupts the value of the URL (suddenly the filename is not the  
filename. The filename is actually an arbutrary query string value). That  
creates more problems than it solves.

 All that being said, yeah I think it would be great if some standard  
 could
 be agreed upon such that enclosure redirects should always end with the
 filename ... why not?

It's not a question of why not it's a question of why.

 Is this something that microformats might be able to provide?

No, microformats are HTML based - this is an HTTP issue.

-- 
Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ 
Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/