Re: [videoblogging] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
From: http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-enclosure - By adding rel=enclosure to a hyperlink, a page indicates that the destination of that hyperlink is intended to be downloaded and cached. That doesn't reflect what me and others discussed on the Microformats mailing list. I'd give you links to the e-mails in the archive... but I'm too tired right now :-) (And yeah, I know, I saw you over there too. Particularly regarding the rel-payment thing for Atom.) I don't think there's been much dissenting opinion over what an enclosure is on the Microformats list. I've been following there for a little over a year and have been pushing for a media microformat. The above was simply copied from their wiki. Like I mentioned before (and as you mention later), a MIME type is NOT always sufficient to tell if something is a video or not. This is because not all videos have a MIME type of the form video/*. Unfortunately, this is true that there are some fringe cases where Mime type is not sufficient to determine the type of media (video, audio, etc.). Actually, Media RSS has an optional attribute called medium to deal with this problem: From: http://video.yahoo.com/mrss medium is the type of object (image | audio | video | document | executable). While this attribute can at times seem redundant if type is supplied, it is included because it simplifies decision making on the reader side, as well as flushes out any ambiguities between MIME type and object type. It is an optional attribute. One example is Ogg (application/ogg). Although container formats in general will have this problem. (Some container formats have video/* forms though.) I think Ogg may be the *only* container format that does this (ok, maybe Smil, but that's not a binary format). Quicktime, ASF, Matroska, 3GP, MP4, AVI, etc. will all be video/* types. The Ogg folks should probably rectify that by allowing audio/ogg and video/ogg Also, systems that shunt themselves via the web will also have this problem. For example, consider this BitTorrent link... BitTorrent unfortunately is mystery meat. But, the mimetype is correct -- a BitTorrent file is a BitTorrent file. Now what's inside is anyone's guess... could be video, audio, or a collection of files and folders of different types. No single mime type would justify what might be *inside* a Torrent. http://example.com/show.torrent#video.mpeg Note that I'm using a URI fragment to access what's inside the torrent. Would that URI resolve to anything? If not then I would think it doesn't make sense. I've never seen that convention used anywhere. I would stick with established Microformat class attributes rather than create new ones and thus more deviation and noise. Which Microformat class attributes would you suggest? relEnclosure is already pretty well established. I've found that VLC is actually pretty common. (At least in BC, Canada. Everyone seems to use it here. Things may be different globally though.) VLC browser plugin is not common at all. It is separate from the VLC desktop application as far as I know. But I think the whole topic of videos having MIME types NOT of the form video/* is an important one to deal with. (Shunting things via new protocols seems to be out of favor due to the nature of the underlying operating systems. Instead, shunting seems to be done via MIME types now. And this will lead to new non- video/* video MIME types.) I don't understand what you mean by shunting? My motivation for class-video is to learn from SMIL. SMIL has a video element. Thus class-video copies that. (This is the Microformat process. Either observe what being done in the wild with HTML and create a semantic HTML specification -- a Microformat -- for it. Or mimic XML paradigms out there. In this case I'm mimicking the XML paradign of SMIL.) That's not exactly the Microformat process - its defined pretty well on their wiki: http://microformats.org/wiki/process Probably best to start there and then propose it on their mailing list after doing more research and documentation. -Josh See ya -Josh On 5/30/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Joshua, On 5/30/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that for most vloggers, they won't bother adding semantic HTML (like rel-enclosure, class-video, or anything) unless they get something else out of it. (Or unless it comes out of some tool.) Absolutely! Its very important to show that you can *do* stuff with semantics. That's why we support the image thumbnail format on FireAnt.tv the way that Andreas described it with the hopes of encouraging people to post images of their videos... However, its still early days, and I think the tools for supporting such standards are still very new. Witness the recent issues with Technorati tags during Videoblogging Week. Even though its a standard there
Re: [videoblogging] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
On Wed, 31 May 2006 01:45:24 +0200, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Although rel-enclosure is enough to tell you it is an enclosure (for all or part of the document it is contained within) is NOT enough to tell you that what it points to is a video. To do that you'd could use the a type attribute, as in... a href="" type=video/mpeg.../a I have been using the type attribute in combination with rel-enclosure since 2004. I know it exists. I also know that it's a *hint* to what might be expected at the end of a link ( URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/links.html#adef-type-A ). If you want to know the content-type do a HEAD request, as a parser you can't trust the type attribute. I use it to generate nicer archive pages on my blog so readers can see what types of enclosures are included before clicking on. Example: URL: http://www.solitude.dk/archives/2006_05.php However, that is NOT even enough. Consider this example a href="" type=application/ogg.../a In this case you don't know if the Ogg file contains video, audio, text, or what? (Ogg, like QuickTime, Matroska, 3GPP, ASF, and others, is a container format that you can put all sort of different types of things into it. And not just video. They don't even have to contain any video.) Thus, another means of semantics is needed. I disagree. It is enough to know that you're looking at OGG content. Content can then be handed off to the player application. -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
On Wed, 31 May 2006 02:16:53 +0200, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a I only wish people were so consistent and reliable. Truth is that there is vast inconsistency in the wild. Many people use text links to point to videos, sometimes they use special play button icons to link to videos (not exactly a thumbnail). Sometimes people link to an HTML page with the media embedded and somtimes they just embed the media and do not use an image to link to it. In practice relEnclosure is rarely, if ever used. Yeah, I know. In regards to thumbnails you can say 'if you want your thumbnail on fireant you will have to use the image as a link to the video'. Then people who wants thumbnails will have to make image links, and you will hopefully get a slow adoption. We run into all sorts of problems like this trying to parse HTML descriptions when we aggregate feeds on FireAnt.tv. If you guys ever want to share any research I'm sure it would be of huge value to the microformats community. I don't think adding additional semantic HTML attributes would help much either. Often the bloggers who post with strange HTML conventions aren't the type of people who know much about HTML. I certainly wouldn't expect them to grok a Microformat like rel=media:thumbnail ... but then perhaps broad acceptance is not really the goal of this proposal anyway. +1 -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
On 5/30/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think adding additional semantic HTML attributes would help much either. Often the bloggers who post with strange HTML conventions aren't the type of people who know much about HTML. I certainly wouldn't expect them to grok a Microformat like rel=media:thumbnail ... but then perhaps broad acceptance is not really the goal of this proposal anyway. Yeah my thinking was that hosters like blip that cross post to your vlog in a variety of templates could inclide rel=media:thumbnail, and services like Feedburner could consume it. The user wouldnt have to do it themselves. (wordpress plugins and the like would end up doing it for them :-P ) eh ... just an idea I had when I should have been thinking about other things. :-) SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
On Wed, 31 May 2006 05:33:44 +0200, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as I can tell, rel-enclosure conveys a totally different meaning than class-video. rel-enclosure essentially says the thing, at the end of this link, is attached to this document (that the rel-enclosure is contained within). And that's all that's needed. It does NOT say play it. It does NOT say it is a video. And it does NOT even say prefetch it. Answers: It shouldn't, it doesn't have to and it shouldn't. Whether or not to 'play' a file should be handled by the user's application. The user is the only person who knows what file types he wants to 'play'. Whether or not something is a video is hinted by the type attribute if available (probably not) and designated by the content-type header. That's enough to know what player application should handle the file. It should not say pre-fetch this. That's not proper use of the rel attribute. It *should* designate the relationship between the two resources (ie. 'B is an attachment to A') and then the user and his application can make informed choices on what to do. For example 'pre-fetch all attachments). -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
What you're probably looking for is a way to group enclosures together to signal that they represent the same content (a representation of media:group in HTML). That allows for the same result, with better mark-up. It's something that Josh K. and I have talked about on this and microformats lists a couple of times in the past, but we're both busy with other things as well. :o) If you had a group (like a class=enclosuregroup) you could use that to locate a thumbnail. - Andreas On Wed, 31 May 2006 00:25:41 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok I dont think what I typed was english ... let me try explaining it this way: [An image or flash player goes here] a href=""> a href="" rel=enclosureQuickTime/A In the above where links to the movie files are below the image ... the image would not be within the rel=enclosure. Arent we seeing alot of this now (pretty sure I am) On 5/30/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes but I'm talking about feed here not a post. Imagine a blog a post lists 3 or 4 different formats. If the enclosure in the feed is QuickTime, but the default link on the post points to WMV or Flash ... a link to the Quicktime file might not have an image within the href tag. There are all sorts of times when an enclosure in a feed cant definatively be tied to a particular image file in the body. the rel=enclosure is not always the default link in the body. On 5/30/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a - Andreas On Tue, 30 May 2006 23:31:24 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ... You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnail rel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension. services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file. This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS. -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Links -- http://www.DavidMeade.com feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
On Wed, 31 May 2006 08:10:44 +0200, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think there's been much dissenting opinion over what an enclosure is on the Microformats list. I've been following there for a little over a year and have been pushing for a media microformat. The above was simply copied from their wiki. I dissented for a while, but it was over semantics (ahaha. Thank you, thank you. I will be here all week). In reality there has hardly been any talk about relEnclosure because it is both simple and well-defined. That's not exactly the Microformat process - its defined pretty well on their wiki: http://microformats.org/wiki/process Probably best to start there and then propose it on their mailing list after doing more research and documentation. +1 -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
Yeah, I know. In regards to thumbnails you can say 'if you want your thumbnail on fireant you will have to use the image as a link to the video'. Then people who wants thumbnails will have to make image links, and you will hopefully get a slow adoption. Yep, that's exactly what we've done. This is explained in our FAQ. We also get some thumbnails from MeFeedia through their API, but that is often less successful than parsing the HTML for images. If you guys ever want to share any research I'm sure it would be of huge value to the microformats community. The main thing I've learned is that there is literally a cacophony of markup styles, formats, and standards such that its very difficult to really nail things down in practice, even when it comes to relatively vanilla HTML or RSS. The shoddy XML support in iTunes has definitely not helped matters when it comes to RSS standardization. Also, there's are a number of methods people use to try to track downloads with redirect scripts which can botch things up in innumerable ways. You're right though, once we get things settled in a little further we should run some reports and create some sort of state of the vlogosphere. -Josh On 5/31/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006 02:16:53 +0200, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src=""> //a I only wish people were so consistent and reliable. Truth is that there is vast inconsistency in the wild. Many people use text links to point to videos, sometimes they use special play button icons to link to videos (not exactly a thumbnail). Sometimes people link to an HTML page with the media embedded and somtimes they just embed the media and do not use an image to link to it. In practice relEnclosure is rarely, if ever used. Yeah, I know. In regards to thumbnails you can say 'if you want your thumbnail on fireant you will have to use the image as a link to the video'. Then people who wants thumbnails will have to make image links, and you will hopefully get a slow adoption. We run into all sorts of problems like this trying to parse HTML descriptions when we aggregate feeds on FireAnt.tv. If you guys ever want to share any research I'm sure it would be of huge value to the microformats community. I don't think adding additional semantic HTML attributes would help much either. Often the bloggers who post with strange HTML conventions aren't the type of people who know much about HTML. I certainly wouldn't expect them to grok a Microformat like rel=media:thumbnail ... but then perhaps broad acceptance is not really the goal of this proposal anyway. +1 -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Links SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
Hello Andres,On 5/30/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006 01:45:24 +0200, Charles Iliya Krempeaux[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Although rel-enclosure is enough to tell you it is an enclosure (for all or part of the document it is contained within) is NOT enough to tell you that what it points to is a video. To do that you'd could use the a type attribute, as in... a href="" type=video/mpeg.../aI have been using the type attribute in combination with rel-enclosuresince 2004. I know it exists. I also know that it's a *hint* to what might be expected at the end of a link ( URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/links.html#adef-type-A ). If you wantto know the content-type do a HEAD request, as a parser you can't trust the type attribute.In my case (with my _javascript_ thing) everything is done in browser. And although one can do an HTTP HEAD request in some cases using XmlHttpRequest. It can't be done when the video is on a different domain. I use it to generate nicer archive pages on my blog so readers can seewhat types of enclosures are included before clicking on. Example: URL: http://www.solitude.dk/archives/2006_05.php However, that is NOT even enough.Consider this example a href="" type=application/ogg.../a In this case you don't know if the Ogg file contains video, audio, text, or what?(Ogg, like QuickTime, Matroska, 3GPP, ASF, and others, is a container format that you can put all sort of different types of things into it. And not just video.They don't even have to contain any video.) Thus, another means of semantics is needed.I disagree. It is enough to know that you're looking at OGG content. Content can then be handed off to the player application.In my case (with my _javascript_ thing) everything is done in browser. What is does is give each a that points to a video an onclick handler. (When the link to the video is clicked, it creates a DHTML player to play the video, instead of just going to the video file.) In my case, simply handing things off to the player was NOT a possibility. I needed to be able to determine which a's pointed to a video and which didn't. rel-enclosure wasn't enough (for reasons I described earlier in this thread). The a's type attribute wasn't enough (for reasons I described earlier in this thread). So I used class-video (in the style of SMIL's video element). See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a - Andreas On Tue, 30 May 2006 23:31:24 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ... You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnail rel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension. services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file. This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS. -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
Yes but I'm talking about feed here not a post.Imagine a blog a post lists 3 or 4 different formats. If the enclosure in the feed is QuickTime, but the default link on the post points to WMV or Flash ... a link to the Quicktime file might not have an image within the href tag. There are all sorts of times when an enclosure in a feed cant definatively be tied to a particular image file in the body. the rel=enclosure is not always the default link in the body. On 5/30/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnailand then not used it as a link to the video. All you need isrel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail.e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a- Andreas On Tue, 30 May 2006 23:31:24 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ... You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnail rel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension. services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file.This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS.--Andreas Haugstrup PedersenURL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--Get to your groups with one click. Know instantly when new email arrives http://us.click.yahoo.com/.7bhrC/MGxNAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM~-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/ -- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed:http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
ok I dont think what I typed was english ... let me try explaining it this way: [An image or flash player goes here] a href=""> a href="" rel=enclosureQuickTime/A In the above where links to the movie files are below the image ... the image would not be within the rel=enclosure. Arent we seeing alot of this now (pretty sure I am) On 5/30/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes but I'm talking about feed here not a post. Imagine a blog a post lists 3 or 4 different formats. If the enclosure in the feed is QuickTime, but the default link on the post points to WMV or Flash ... a link to the Quicktime file might not have an image within the href tag. There are all sorts of times when an enclosure in a feed cant definatively be tied to a particular image file in the body. the rel=enclosure is not always the default link in the body. On 5/30/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a - Andreas On Tue, 30 May 2006 23:31:24 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ... You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnail rel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension. services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file. This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS. -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Links -- http://www.DavidMeade.com feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed -- http://www.DavidMeade.com feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
Hello,I have a _javascript_ thing in the works that uses semantic HTML like that.In the first version of the script (which coincidentally I'm going to try an release this week... depending on how busy I am with work) you make videos like so... a class=video href="">In the next version, it allows for more semantics, so that you can add thumbnails (as well as width, height, etc), like... span class=video a class=video:href href=""> img class=video:thumbnail src="" / (span class=video:width640/spanxspan class=video:height480/span) /a/spanAfter that, I'm adding the ability to specify alternatives (of the same thing... like if you were to offer a video in mutliple formats or different resolutions, etc). And being able specify a series (where the show is made up of a series of videos,... for example, part 1 or 3, part 2 or 3, part 3 or 3.) (If you want to see an incomplete demo with debug messages everywhere let me know.)See yaOn 5/30/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ...You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnailrel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension.services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file. This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS. -- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
Hello,Forgot to mention that you need to specify the type attribute on the a. So, for example, the first example should be:a class=video href="" movie.mpeg type=video/mpeg.../a(And likewise with the second example.)Note, this could be mixed with rel=enclosure to get... a rel=enclosure class=video href="" type=video/mpeg.../a See yaOn 5/30/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello,I have a _javascript_ thing in the works that uses semantic HTML like that.In the first version of the script (which coincidentally I'm going to try an release this week... depending on how busy I am with work) you make videos like so... a class=video href="">In the next version, it allows for more semantics, so that you can add thumbnails (as well as width, height, etc), like... span class=video a class=video:href href=""> img class=video:thumbnail src="" / (span class=video:width640/spanxspan class=video:height480/span) /a/spanAfter that, I'm adding the ability to specify alternatives (of the same thing... like if you were to offer a video in mutliple formats or different resolutions, etc). And being able specify a series (where the show is made up of a series of videos,... for example, part 1 or 3, part 2 or 3, part 3 or 3.) (If you want to see an incomplete demo with debug messages everywhere let me know.)See yaOn 5/30/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ...You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnailrel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension.services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file. This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS. -- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.charles @ reptile.casupercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
Hello Andreas,Although rel-enclosure is enough to tell you it is an enclosure (for all or part of the document it is contained within) is NOT enough to tell you that what it points to is a video.To do that you'd could use the a type attribute, as in... a href="" type=video/mpeg.../aHowever, that is NOT even enough. Consider this example a href="" type=application/ogg.../aIn this case you don't know if the Ogg file contains video, audio, text, or what? (Ogg, like QuickTime, Matroska, 3GPP, ASF, and others, is a container format that you can put all sort of different types of things into it. And not just video. They don't even have to contain any video.) Thus, another means of semantics is needed.With a _javascript_ thing I have been using I use class-video to mark a video. For example...a class=video href="" type=application/ogg.../a(Note, rel-video would be wrong. In this case class-video is appropriate. If you would like me to elaborate on that let me know.) See yaOn 5/30/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnailand then not used it as a link to the video. All you need isrel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail.e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a- Andreas On Tue, 30 May 2006 23:31:24 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ... You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnail rel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension. services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file.This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS.--Andreas Haugstrup PedersenURL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc .charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a I only wish people were so consistent and reliable. Truth is that there is vast inconsistency in the wild. Many people use text links to point to videos, sometimes they use special play button icons to link to videos (not exactly a thumbnail). Sometimes people link to an HTML page with the media embedded and somtimes they just embed the media and do not use an image to link to it. In practice relEnclosure is rarely, if ever used. We run into all sorts of problems like this trying to parse HTML descriptions when we aggregate feeds on FireAnt.tv. I don't think adding additional semantic HTML attributes would help much either. Often the bloggers who post with strange HTML conventions aren't the type of people who know much about HTML. I certainly wouldn't expect them to grok a Microformat like rel=media:thumbnail ... but then perhaps broad acceptance is not really the goal of this proposal anyway. -Josh On 5/30/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a - Andreas On Tue, 30 May 2006 23:31:24 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ... You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnail rel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension. services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file. This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS. -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Links SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
Hello Joshua,I think that for most vloggers, they won't bother adding semantic HTML (like rel-enclosure, class-video, or anything) unless they get something else out of it. (Or unless it comes out of some tool.) I've been working on a _javascript_ thing that creates a little DHTML player if you use class-video. For example...a class=video href="" type=application/ogg.../a So, people who would use my _javascript_ thing would be incentivized to add a class-video so that the DHTML player works. (That of course would have the added advantage of letting other software understand what is and isn't a video.) But that assumes the vlogger has the skills to do the HTML coding (to add the semantic HTML and bring in the _javascript_ thing).Alternatively, the tools vloggers use to create posts could automagically produce the appropriate semantic HTML. See yaOn 5/30/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a I only wish people were so consistent and reliable. Truth is thatthere is vast inconsistency in the wild.Many people use text links to point to videos, sometimes they usespecial play button icons to link to videos (not exactly a thumbnail). Sometimes people link to an HTML page with the mediaembedded and somtimes they just embed the media and do not use animage to link to it. In practice relEnclosure is rarely, if ever used.We run into all sorts of problems like this trying to parse HTML descriptions when we aggregate feeds on FireAnt.tv.I don't think adding additional semantic HTML attributes would helpmuch either. Often the bloggers who post with strange HTML conventionsaren't the type of people who know much about HTML. I certainly wouldn't expect them to grok a Microformat like rel=media:thumbnail... but then perhaps broad acceptance is not really the goal of thisproposal anyway.-JoshOn 5/30/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a - Andreas On Tue, 30 May 2006 23:31:24 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ... You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnail rel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension. services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file.This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS. -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
I think that for most vloggers, they won't bother adding semantic HTML (like rel-enclosure, class-video, or anything) unless they get something else out of it. (Or unless it comes out of some tool.) Absolutely! Its very important to show that you can *do* stuff with semantics. That's why we support the image thumbnail format on FireAnt.tv the way that Andreas described it with the hopes of encouraging people to post images of their videos... However, its still early days, and I think the tools for supporting such standards are still very new. Witness the recent issues with Technorati tags during Videoblogging Week. Even though its a standard there still seems to be much chaos and non-interoperability. That's not to say that these things won't grow into something more tangible in the future... I certainly hope so, that's why I'm doing these things. I've been working on a _javascript_ thing that creates a little DHTML player if you use class-video. For example... a class=video href="" type=application/ogg.../a Why not go with the existing Microformat, rel=enclosure ? -Josh On 5/30/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Joshua, I think that for most vloggers, they won't bother adding semantic HTML (like rel-enclosure, class-video, or anything) unless they get something else out of it. (Or unless it comes out of some tool.) I've been working on a _javascript_ thing that creates a little DHTML player if you use class-video. For example... a class=video href="" type=application/ogg.../a So, people who would use my _javascript_ thing would be incentivized to add a class-video so that the DHTML player works. (That of course would have the added advantage of letting other software understand what is and isn't a video.) But that assumes the vlogger has the skills to do the HTML coding (to add the semantic HTML and bring in the _javascript_ thing). Alternatively, the tools vloggers use to create posts could automagically produce the appropriate semantic HTML. See ya On 5/30/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a I only wish people were so consistent and reliable. Truth is that there is vast inconsistency in the wild. Many people use text links to point to videos, sometimes they use special play button icons to link to videos (not exactly a thumbnail). Sometimes people link to an HTML page with the media embedded and somtimes they just embed the media and do not use an image to link to it. In practice relEnclosure is rarely, if ever used. We run into all sorts of problems like this trying to parse HTML descriptions when we aggregate feeds on FireAnt.tv. I don't think adding additional semantic HTML attributes would help much either. Often the bloggers who post with strange HTML conventions aren't the type of people who know much about HTML. I certainly wouldn't expect them to grok a Microformat like rel=media:thumbnail ... but then perhaps broad acceptance is not really the goal of this proposal anyway. -Josh On 5/30/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is unnecessary. I have never met a blogger who have put up a thumbnail and then not used it as a link to the video. All you need is rel=enclosure - if that link points to a video resource then you can safely assume that the first image contained in the link is the thumbnail. e.g. a href="" rel=enclosureimg src="" //a - Andreas On Tue, 30 May 2006 23:31:24 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: an idea just hit me out of the blue ... it may be stupid, or it may be already done, but I figured this group could let me know on either ... You know how we have rel=enclosure for links in a post that should be enclosed in a feed ... how about a new micro-format for rel=media:thumbnail rel=media:thumbnail could be added to an image in a post so that this image could be included as the still image for the MRSS extension. services like blip which cross post to your blog could include the rel=media:thumbnail automatically and feedburner could then insert that image into your MRSS info (feedburner already inserts some MRSS in there). I've got a few cool ideas in the back of my head on ways to consume a feed, but a few of them would work far better if I KNEW what image the blogger wanted to use to represent thier video/audio file. This sort of solution would allow for a much broader adoption of the media:thumbnail element in RSS. -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL:
Re: [videoblogging] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
Hello Joshua,On 5/30/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that for most vloggers, they won't bother adding semantic HTML (like rel-enclosure, class-video, or anything) unless they get something else out of it.(Or unless it comes out of some tool.)Absolutely! Its very important to show that you can *do* stuff with semantics. That's why we support the image thumbnail format onFireAnt.tv the way that Andreas described it with the hopes ofencouraging people to post images of their videos...However, its still early days, and I think the tools for supporting such standards are still very new. Witness the recent issues withTechnorati tags during Videoblogging Week. Even though its astandard there still seems to be much chaos andnon-interoperability. That's not to say that these things won't grow into something moretangible in the future... I certainly hope so, that's why I'm doingthese things. I've been working on a _javascript_ thing that creates a little DHTML player if you use class-video.For example... a class=video href="" type=application/ogg.../aWhy not go with the existing Microformat, rel=enclosure ? As far as I can tell, rel-enclosure conveys a totally different meaning than class-video.rel-enclosure essentially says the thing, at the end of this link, is attached to this document (that the rel-enclosure is contained within). It does NOT say play it. It does NOT say it is a video. And it does NOT even say prefetch it.Consider this example...a rel=enclosure href="" .../aThere's a rel-enclosure there, but this is a PDF. Certainly we would NOT want to try to play this as a video.You might say, but I know this is a PDF,... of course I'm not going to try and play it as a video. But, Now, what if we didn't put an extension on our file, and instead we had...a rel=enclosure href="">What would we do then? It is still a PDF, but we can't immediately tell. So, we might try using the a's type attribute, and have something like this...a rel=enclosure href="" type=application/pdf.../a But is the type attribute enough. If we had something like any of these, then I'd say yes...a rel=enclosure href="" type=video/mpeg.../a a rel=enclosure href="" type=video/3gpp.../aa rel=enclosure href="" type=video/jpeg.../a But this depends on have all videos have a MIME type of form video/*. But this is NOT always the case. Some videos do NOT have a MIME type of the form video/*. For example... a rel=enclosure href="" type=application/ogg.../aapplication/ogg is the MIME type for Ogg. Ogg, like QuickTime, Matroska, 3GPP, and ASF is container formats. And you can put all sorts of things in them. (And not just necessarily video.) Like text, audio, images, and video too. But a particular file does NOT have to have any video at all. Now, you could claim that videos that don't have a MIME type of the form video/* are messed up and have done something wrong. However, this is a reality that we have to live with it.And eventually, you come back to the question of,... how do you show a link in an HTML file points to a video. (And given you don't see anything wrong with my reasoning and logic) we need something like class-video to show it. So I suggest class-video.See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains 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] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
From: http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-enclosure - By adding rel=enclosure to a hyperlink, a page indicates that the destination of that hyperlink is intended to be downloaded and cached. E.g. with the following hyperlink: a href="" href="http://homepage.mac.com/kevinmarks/wwdc2005.mov">http://homepage.mac.com/kevinmarks/wwdc2005.mov rel=enclosureWWDC 2005 Keynote with chapters/a the author indicates that the movie should be downloaded. - Doesn't matter whether the link points to a video or a PDF (should it?). The type can be specified with the type attribute, or using correct Mime-types on the server (preferred). I would stick with established Microformat class attributes rather than create new ones and thus more deviation and noise. Seems like application/ogg is quite a fringe case (not even sure if its generally playable in the browser, unless you are playing it with a VLC browser plugin... which is also pretty rare). You could probably modify your _javascript_ to filter based on accepted list of type attributes including video/* and application/ogg and perhaps a handful of other embeddable video formats that use application/*... not sure what those might be? -Josh On 5/30/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Joshua, On 5/30/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that for most vloggers, they won't bother adding semantic HTML (like rel-enclosure, class-video, or anything) unless they get something else out of it. (Or unless it comes out of some tool.) Absolutely! Its very important to show that you can *do* stuff with semantics. That's why we support the image thumbnail format on FireAnt.tv the way that Andreas described it with the hopes of encouraging people to post images of their videos... However, its still early days, and I think the tools for supporting such standards are still very new. Witness the recent issues with Technorati tags during Videoblogging Week. Even though its a standard there still seems to be much chaos and non-interoperability. That's not to say that these things won't grow into something more tangible in the future... I certainly hope so, that's why I'm doing these things. I've been working on a _javascript_ thing that creates a little DHTML player if you use class-video. For example... a class=video href="" type=application/ogg.../a Why not go with the existing Microformat, rel=enclosure ? As far as I can tell, rel-enclosure conveys a totally different meaning than class-video. rel-enclosure essentially says the thing, at the end of this link, is attached to this document (that the rel-enclosure is contained within). It does NOT say play it. It does NOT say it is a video. And it does NOT even say prefetch it. Consider this example... a rel=enclosure href="" .../a There's a rel-enclosure there, but this is a PDF. Certainly we would NOT want to try to play this as a video. You might say, but I know this is a PDF,... of course I'm not going to try and play it as a video. But, Now, what if we didn't put an extension on our file, and instead we had... a rel=enclosure href=""> What would we do then? It is still a PDF, but we can't immediately tell. So, we might try using the a's type attribute, and have something like this... a rel=enclosure href="" type=application/pdf.../a But is the type attribute enough. If we had something like any of these, then I'd say yes... a rel=enclosure href="" type=video/mpeg.../a a rel=enclosure href="" type=video/3gpp.../a a rel=enclosure href="" type=video/jpeg.../a But this depends on have all videos have a MIME type of form video/*. But this is NOT always the case. Some videos do NOT have a MIME type of the form video/*. For example... a rel=enclosure href="" type=application/ogg.../a application/ogg is the MIME type for Ogg. Ogg, like QuickTime, Matroska, 3GPP, and ASF is container formats. And you can put all sorts of things in them. (And not just necessarily video.) Like text, audio, images, and video too. But a particular file does NOT have to have any video at all. Now, you could claim that videos that don't have a MIME type of the form video/* are messed up and have done something wrong. However, this is a reality that we have to live with it. And eventually, you come back to the question of,... how do you show a link in an HTML file points to a video. (And given you don't see anything wrong with my reasoning and logic) we need something like class-video to show it. So I suggest class-video. See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your
Re: [videoblogging] Idea: New microformat: rel=media:thumbnail
Hello Joshua,On 5/30/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-enclosure-By adding rel=enclosure to a hyperlink, a page indicates that thedestination of that hyperlink is intended to be downloaded and cached. That doesn't reflect what me and others discussed on the Microformats mailing list. I'd give you links to the e-mails in the archive... but I'm too tired right now :-) (And yeah, I know, I saw you over there too. Particularly regarding the rel-payment thing for Atom.) (That should be corrected. Although I'm sure we'll get into an long argument about it over there :-) ) E.g. with the following hyperlink:a href="" href="http://homepage.mac.com/kevinmarks/wwdc2005.mov">http://homepage.mac.com/kevinmarks/wwdc2005.movrel=enclosureWWDC 2005 Keynote with chapters/a the author indicates that the movie should be downloaded.-Doesn't matter whether the link points to a video or a PDF (shouldit?). The type can be specified with the type attribute, or using correct Mime-types on the server (preferred).Like I mentioned before (and as you mention later), a MIME type is NOT always sufficient to tell if something is a video or not. This is because not all videos have a MIME type of the form video/*. One example is Ogg (application/ogg). Although container formats in general will have this problem. (Some container formats have video/* forms though.)Also, systems that shunt themselves via the web will also have this problem. For example, consider this BitTorrent link... http://example.com/show.torrentIt's MIME type is application/x-bittorrent. Now let's say it contains one video: video.mpegNow consider this URI that refers to a video coming from a torrent...http://example.com/show.torrent#video.mpeg Note that I'm using a URI fragment to access what's inside the torrent.I think that this type of thing will continue.Also, given that we are trying to put semantics in the HTML it would suggest to me that keeping a list of non- video/* video MIME types is antithetical to the goals here. Having such a list takes the semantics out of the HTML. I would stick with established Microformat class attributes ratherthan create new ones and thus more deviation and noise. Which Microformat class attributes would you suggest? Seems like application/ogg is quite a fringe case (not even sure ifits generally playable in the browser, unless you are playing it witha VLC browser plugin... which is also pretty rare). I've found that VLC is actually pretty common. (At least in BC, Canada. Everyone seems to use it here. Things may be different globally though.)But I think the whole topic of videos having MIME types NOT of the form video/* is an important one to deal with. (Shunting things via new protocols seems to be out of favor due to the nature of the underlying operating systems. Instead, shunting seems to be done via MIME types now. And this will lead to new non- video/* video MIME types.) You could probably modify your _javascript_ to filter based on acceptedlist of type attributes including video/* and application/ogg and perhaps a handful of other embeddable video formats that useapplication/*... not sure what those might be?My motivation for class-video is to learn fromSMIL. SMIL has a video element. Thus class-video copies that. (This is the Microformat process. Either observe what being done in the wild with HTML and create a semantic HTML specification -- a Microformat -- for it. Or mimic XML paradigms out there. In this case I'm mimicking the XML paradign of SMIL.)See ya -JoshOn 5/30/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hello Joshua, On 5/30/06, Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that for most vloggers, they won't bother adding semantic HTML (like rel-enclosure, class-video, or anything) unless they get something else out of it.(Or unless it comes out of some tool.) Absolutely! Its very important to show that you can *do* stuff with semantics. That's why we support the image thumbnail format on FireAnt.tv the way that Andreas described it with the hopes of encouraging people to post images of their videos... However, its still early days, and I think the tools for supporting such standards are still very new. Witness the recent issues with Technorati tags during Videoblogging Week. Even though its a standard there still seems to be much chaos and non-interoperability. That's not to say that these things won't grow into something more tangible in the future... I certainly hope so, that's why I'm doing these things.I've been working on a _javascript_ thing that creates a little DHTML player if you use class-video.For example... a class=video href="" type=application/ogg.../a Why not go with the existing Microformat, rel=enclosure ? As far as I can tell, rel-enclosure conveys a totally different meaning than class-video. rel-enclosure essentially says the thing, at the end of this link, is attached to this
