James Ockenden wrote:
Interesting news from Tivo, it has been measuring 20,000 users
second-by-second viewing habits. The results show people actually like
the direct response ads better...
more interesting i thought was how StopWatch managed the 20,000
CRID/URI-style info streaming in every
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:19:34 +0100, Mr I Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Following from the debate about links for programmes... how about this?
http://blogs.sun.com/sandoz/entry/bbc_web_api_beta - found via George.
Funny this should come up now.
The system we were just talking about in
I mean that's better in some ways certainly, but you'd probably also
want to create some sort of canonical identifier that would represent
the band so that if anyone was doing anything programmatically across
the web they would be able to connect the two concepts. I mean, YOU
might know
OR I'd go for something much more interesting.
Given that Wikipedia has pages on most of these artists and
that-by its nature-it has to have a separate page for each
one of them, then you can view that as a well maintained
centralised controlled vocabulary. I'd probably go with using
I agree with tom coates on this one: if you DON'T use Wikipedia as a
Web-native classification engine in your application, then you are
missing a trick, because it proves intensely useful! one URI per
distinct Concept? use those as subjects and objects in your RDF... talk
about evidence for
At 11:36 +0100 17/7/07, Jonathan Tweed wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:19:34 +0100, Mr I Forrester
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Following from the debate about links for programmes... how about this?
http://blogs.sun.com/sandoz/entry/bbc_web_api_beta - found via George.
Funny this should come up
If we're talking sematic applications, it might actually be good for an
organisation like the BBC (and partner broadcasters to actually sit down
and work out some standard ontologies to make it easy for heavy duty
(RDF-heavy) applications talk nicely to each other. It may even have
some
Don't get me wrong, for the right apps wikipedia is just great and gives
you a great resource to work with. And it's true that in some cases if
you DON'T use Wikipedia as a Web-native classification engine in your
application, then you are missing a trick. Just not always.
It's just that the
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:32:18 +0100, Gordon Joly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Plus ca change?
True, but the data differs in content as well as conceptual structure. I'm not
overly familiar with the BBC Web API but there also seems to be more metadata
in Pips.
Pips is episode centric. You can ask
well said, darren... I must admit, I share your dream that auntie
might play a role in the area you describe...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren Stephens
Sent: 17 July 2007 14:59
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE:
Now, I might have this wrong - but you're suggesting that
there should be a standard way of... describing data
suggested by the BBC, so that all systems structure their
data in the same way?
Not quite. There should be one or more standards for appropriate
applications suggested by a
On 7/17/07, Darren Stephens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There should be one or more standards for appropriate
applications suggested by a wider community (broadcasters - of which the
BBC is but one) so that all systems structure their data in a way that
is able to be widely understood. For example,
12 matches
Mail list logo
