Re: [backstage] Backstage - Stagnant
I have to agree with you that at times the list has been very quiet, and some new prototypes or feeds would help fix that. However, that means that people have to make new prototypes or feeds. There are a lot of "Ideas" on the Backstage site, but the problem with them is that a lot are suggestions to the BBC about what content could be put out there, and only a few are ideas about what to do with what is there. Some of those could be developed though. Ben/Jem, any chance of splitting the ideas section into two parts under that kind of split (for BBC and for developers)? It would make it better for everyone. Personally I would like to make a new prototype, and there is something that I started a while ago but never finished. Might try and finish it over the next few days/weeks. It would be nice to get some ideas from people who aren't developers (and therefore won't be restricted by the "that's not possible" thoughts), and BBC staff would be as good as anyone for that. There may also be ideas that Ben/Jem/anyone else involved in Backstage have been hiding from us, so they could be good too. There is also the option of trying to come up with a backstage open source project, where we try to make something for the BBC, but the problems with that are that it may not get used (not so much of a problem if it is something general) and that it may be seen as the BBC getting work done for free (although not the people making it, but from people who aren't familiar with the whole idea of volunteering code/time for a project for what would effectively be commercial use, even when that was clearly stated at the start). Backstage does seem to vary greatly in activity, with massive peaks at key points (around the launch and competition deadline for example) and very low activity in between. It would be nice to have more activity all the time ... It has been suggested in the past that universities be invited to encourage students to participate in Backstage. Has there been any progress about that? Duncan James wrote: Hi, Please don't read this in the wrong way but is the backstage project becoming stagnant? A few months ago there was a lot of hype and it sounded promising but for me personally I havent seen much in the way of new "things" for the developing community to use. Yes, the feeds are great but to some extent they were already out there and if we're honest it was only a matter of time before people began to use them without the BBC's consent. We are yet to see anything of the API's which have been "to follow soon" for months now and there has been little implementation or word of it from any of the numerous prototypes that have been put out. As a group I've also noticed that messages are sparse and recently more about petty points than anything interesting to developing. I think the concept of the backstage is great but I for one would like to see a more active, engaging approach from the BBC and I think there is only so many places one can take an RSS XML feed... How about some ideas from the BBC about things they would like to see? How about real life ideas which they potentially want to implement? Any thoughts on this? Jim. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Backstage - Stagnant
Jim, I somewhat agree. I am not a programmer but I watch the mails here for a clue as to where people want things to go. The BBC have incredible resources yet there seems to be more innovation of the Apple Discussions board. As an example, this week Sky News re- launched, even as a normal event there should be a complete re-design of the BBC news site by now. There was one defining point for me during the competition, before the summer, there was a lot of discussion about copyright. I am sure that there are loads of ideas on both sides, but until the BBC themselves get organised, most of the content is locked under the control of the owner. In my opinion that never leads to innovation I can watch complete TV channels, live from the US and only old programmes. I can listen to any radio on the planet, but I can't make a podcast using any copyrighted music.. well for a start the BBC owns most of the Mechanical rights to the music historically played on Top of the Pops. At least in the 70's and 80's all artists re-recorded their work just for that show. As Duncan says, it is a two way street here. My thing is music, but I see Backstage as a programmers BBC3.. I think it should be serious, and therefore needs it's own copyright contract and possibly some kind of fee structure for both sides. I don't mean that people have to pay, but there needs to be some incentive. If there is a future for the BBC's own content then they need to tell us more about what we can have access to not just wait till guys this side ask. Plus if the programmers are going to put in the hours there needs to be a light at the end of the tunnel. After all if I wrote a TV show I would know that I could get the BBC to get involved with all the technical aspects of filming. they would still pay me as well, plus give me a contract for any future uses. I just want to watch all the BBC channels live on the web. now that would be excellent. Rich On 25 Oct 2005, at 18:02, James wrote: Hi, Please don't read this in the wrong way but is the backstage project becoming stagnant? A few months ago there was a lot of hype and it sounded promising but for me personally I havent seen much in the way of new things for the developing community to use. Yes, the feeds are great but to some extent they were already out there and if we're honest it was only a matter of time before people began to use them without the BBC's consent. We are yet to see anything of the API's which have been to follow soon for months now and there has been little implementation or word of it from any of the numerous prototypes that have been put out. As a group I've also noticed that messages are sparse and recently more about petty points than anything interesting to developing. I think the concept of the backstage is great but I for one would like to see a more active, engaging approach from the BBC and I think there is only so many places one can take an RSS XML feed... How about some ideas from the BBC about things they would like to see? How about real life ideas which they potentially want to implement? Any thoughts on this? Jim. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/ mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail- archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Competition
Maybe when you get back we could compare notes - I wrote some web services to query the tvanytime data - I'm a Microsofteeand would be interesting to see how you tackled the problem. Ben, et al. any chance we could look at implementing a web service to tack onto the existing BBC schedules site - it would cut out the hassles involved with managing copies of the tv anytime data ? We got roped into the billion minutes thing at work - BBC provides a public service - I'd rather spend my 2500 minutes working on something like this, rather than out in the rain. On 10/25/05, Adam Leach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All,Is there any news on the results of the competition?It has been a few weeks and unless I have missed something, it hasn't been mentioned for a while.Unfortunately the VoIP and SMS parts of my project are currently unavailable asI'm on holiday and didn't want to leave it running unattended and my computerhas a habit of over heating :-( On a different subject would anyone have any use for a TV Listings SOAP Service?I'm currently working on one to help integrate the different parts of myproject, but could make it available to other people. Have fun, I'm off for some Moroccan mint tea :-)Adam-Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- You can't build a reputation based on what you are going to do.
Re: [backstage] Backstage - Stagnant
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Richard Edwards wrote: I somewhat agree. I am not a programmer but I watch the mails here for a clue as to where people want things to go. The BBC have incredible resources yet there seems to be more innovation of the Apple Discussions board. As an example, this week Sky News re-launched, even as a normal event there should be a complete re-design of the BBC news site by now. Eh? Why would Sky News being re-launched (which was such massive news in and of itself that this was the first I'd heard of it!) cause a complete redesign of the BBC news website? I can imagine it working the other way round, but why would a leading UK web news service change its distinctive look-n-feel just because a wannabe has tried to rebrand itself? As Duncan says, it is a two way street here. My thing is music, but I see Backstage as a programmers BBC3.. I think it should be serious, and therefore needs it's own copyright contract and possibly some kind of fee structure for both sides. Oh no! That sounds like it will just drift down the commercial route. Those of us who just want to play with BBC services and scratch a developmental itch will be back to square one. If folk want money-exchanging-contracts with the BBC, please do it in smoke filled rooms and not on backstage. As for the bursty nature of this mailing list, it probably depends on many factors, including (but not limited to) folks' free time, competition dead lines, sudden bouts of ideas and folk bouncing new ideas off each other. I don't think we've seen a killer app yet that creates a constant background of postings. Jim'll - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Backstage - Stagnant
if you look at the way they've rehashed their schedule Sky News is actually moving closer to the News 24 editorial style - having more 'programming' and less rolling news. On 10/26/05, Richard Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps my analogy misled you.The BBC, as a television network has continually moved forwarditself. Most of the high points were when creative genius invented a certain quality for the public to consume. be it in news,entertainment or information on the web.It is not a competitionbetween Sky and the BBC as you say. but re-branding happens inboth organisations. So how can the BBC in one infant area lead the way now? It is myopinion that copyright and access to certain information and contentgo hand in hand. Whether it can be free and used as such isdetermined by those very contracts. A few days ago there was a discussion about using the Met office feeds. as far as I saw,once the price that they charge for their service was mentioned thenthe ideas dried up.It is interesting that this is a public corporation yet the nearest the actual designers and programmers get to having all that supportis basically to give away your project should it be any good.I think a balance of being actually able to access expensivecontent ... BBC services for your itch if you like, and having the programmers supported in their ventures, in any way, is prettyimportant. I can think of a million things to do with old programmes,just like the original dance beats of the late eighties and ninetiescame from earlier songs looped or sampled by artists who were just in to music. Those programmers took action to use that content.This can be a brilliant place for ideas, but ultimately those ideasseem to me mostly attached to the control and distribution ofdata . would be great to hear from the corporation, what have they actually got than can be used now?RichOn 25 Oct 2005, at 22:06, J.P.Knight wrote: On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Richard Edwards wrote: I somewhat agree. I am not a programmer but I watch the mails here for a clue as to where people want things to go. The BBC have incredible resources yet there seems to be more innovation of the Apple Discussions board. As an example, this week Sky News re- launched, even as a normal event there should be a complete re- design of the BBC news site by now. Eh?Why would Sky News being re-launched (which was such massive news in and of itself that this was the first I'd heard of it!) cause a complete redesign of the BBC news website?I can imagine it working the other way round, but why would a leading UK web news service change its distinctive look-n-feel just because a wannabe has tried to rebrand itself? As Duncan says, it is a two way street here. My thing is music, but I see Backstage as a programmers BBC3.. I think it should be serious, and therefore needs it's own copyright contract and possibly some kind of fee structure for both sides. Oh no!That sounds like it will just drift down the commercial route. Those of us who just want to play with BBC services and scratch a developmental itch will be back to square one.If folk want money- exchanging-contracts with the BBC, please do it in smoke filled rooms and not on backstage. As for the bursty nature of this mailing list, it probably depends on many factors, including (but not limited to) folks' free time, competition dead lines, sudden bouts of ideas and folk bouncing new ideas off each other. I don't think we've seen a killer app yet that creates a constant background of postings. Jim'll - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/ mailing_list.html.Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail- archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/-Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/-- You can't build a reputation based on what you are going to do.
Re: [backstage] Backstage - Stagnant
Hi Jim et al
Fear not, Jim, your post won't be read the wrong way. I want to
thank you for sending it, Backstage is mostly my fault, and your
email stung - in a good way. I hope you'll have provide the kick up
the posterior that helps ensure henceforth reality matches rhetoric.
There are several reasons (some sound, some not-so-sound) why we've
not yet managed to make more APIs available. All I can ask for is
(yet more) patience. We do have some tasty new stuff in the works - a
BBC programme archive catalogue API, for instance - although the
postcoder API probably isn't going to be as sexy as we'd dearly wish,
for all the usual dull rights-related reasons. Before he set off on
his hols, Ben was hopeful about weather, but the truth is you never
really know what fresh problems are going to hit until the 'go live'
button is just about to be pressed (and sometimes only after that...).
The benefits of 'open media' are second nature to many people on this
list, but it still an alien concept to most rights holders, be they
inside or outside the BBC. Much of our work has focused on selling
an open media model inside the BBC - probably too much of our time,
seeing how we've neglected the very people we should be serving
first (you lot).
Our lack of engagement and communication with all of you on this list
is exceptionally bad form, for which I apologise on behalf of the BBC.
Maybe we really have 'gone a bit native'. Strange behaviours surface
when you see bbc.co.uk at the end of your email address; fear of
bringing opprobrium to the BBC due to saying the wrong thing in
public can cause otherwise eloquent BBC employees to clam up. Ask us
questions - there are lots of BBC people on this list.
Whatever, it's clear that the consequences of staying schtum on a
list such as this outweighs the risks outlined above.
So sod it, I for one am going to deliver a BBC.co.uk core dump:
1) What is the BBC's Internet Strategy?
It's here, in strategy-speak powerpoint.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/commissioning/newmedia/bbccoukstrat.ppt
or here, or horridly exported html
http://www.tomski.com/bbcstrategy/bbccoukstrat.htm
To summarise, the BBC's internet priorities are:
i) On Demand ('How can we make our programme available on demand?')
ii) Context ('How can we aggregate public service media produced by
the BBC and by others in new and valuable ways? How can we help
people navigate round it all given the paradox of choice?')
iii) Engagement ('Our website is successful, but still feels like
Ceefax v2.0 - how can we turn bbc.co.uk into a true many to many
public service media environment, while still keeping hold of the
values which have made the BBC what it is today etc etc'
iv) Ubiquity ('How can we get our content everywhere people might want it?')
2) Ideas which get me going, and might persuade me to splash some
cash, include:
- Brand new ways of aggregating, navigating, annotating, searching
and generally getting to grips with 1,000s of TV Radio programmes
in an online environment (not just the web - anything IM-related
would rock). Trust me, have no poverty of ambition with this stuff.
The more bonkers the better. Nothing is sacrasanct, including
channels, the schedule and especially the traditional EPG grid.
- The bbc.co.uk homepage: It's always been an awkward compromise.
Please tell us how to make it better. Please. Less has got to be more.
I'm glad to report progress implementing one simple but powerful idea
from backstage - a BBC homepage archive will go live soon as a
result of this prototype:
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/prototypes/archives/2005/07/bbc_homepage_ar.html
and yes, he did get paid.
- Local, local, local. New, clever ways to tag aggregate as wide a
range of BBC content as poss, even in the absence of geocoding. The
challenge here isn't so much the aggregating (postcodes, anyone?),
it's more about scraping existing content and making educated
guesses about the localities for which any given url is relevent.
You've done some awesome stuff integrating BBC content with Google
Maps, but I just know it's possible to go much, much further.
- Any radical innovation in PVR EPGs. I'd love to hear from anyone
playing with Digital TV Radio - be that with Freeview versions of
the MythTV open source EPG or Topsfield 5800s ( see
http://www.toppy.org.uk/ ) The pandora/promise.tv 7-day PVR started
life as a Myth TV-based prototype we commissioned (see
http://www.promise.tv ) In short, bring internet thinking to Digital
TV radio - it's fun, and the collision between the two worlds is
bound to lead to some tasty new stuff emerging.
3) Enough of me telling you want the BBC wants from you. What else do
you want from us?
More than the usuals
-Tom
Hi,
Please don't read this in the wrong way but is the backstage project
becoming stagnant?
A few months ago there was a lot of hype and it sounded promising
but for me personally I
