Re: [videoblogging] deeplinking considered n/a

On 28/06/2004, at 4:59 AM, Ryan Shaw wrote:

> As we've mentioned, there are two issues at work here: bandwidth and
> context. The first is a technical issue, probably best addressed by
> things like freecache.org or bittorrent.
>
> The second is perhaps more interesting. People want to control the
> context within which their work is seen. At a fundamental level this
> means proper accreditation–if I put your photos on my website it
> implies that I took those photos, unless I specifically mention
> otherwise.

good points made here Ryan.
>
> It gets more complex that that, though. An image or a video shot,
> unlike
> a blog post or a news article, has no intrinsic meaning. These forms
> of expression get their meaning from the context in which they are
> presented. In film this phenomenon is known as the Kuleshov effect[1].
> On the web, the possibilities for recontextualization are endless, and
> it is this fact, the fact that I can totally change the meaning of your
> work and that you are powerless to stop me, that leads to kind of
> anti-deep linking sentiment that Lucas finds so silly.

wearing my academic hat i wrote about this as a general condition of
hypertext (cinematic paradigms of hypertext) a few years ago. it is a
condition of these environments (actually it's a condition of all
discursive environments, just made more visible in hypertextual
environments) and I'd agree, you have to get on with it, live with
this, otherwise go back to linear media 🙂

blogs have addressed this quite well: you provide a link to what you
are commenting upon, so the 'original' context can be retrieved by a
reader, but also in blogs these contexts emerge as 'sets' of links
amongst blogs. So in the case of blogs context is always understood as
this thing that lies between posts not just within posts. This is
*very* important.

>
> This is a sociocultural issue that doesn't have any technical
> solutions,
> and I suspect that videobloggers will be wrestling with it long after
> the technical issues are ancient history. More sophisticated schemes
> for
> embedding metadata about authorship, intention, history, etc. in files
> will help, I think, as well as media players that can understand and
> use
> such metadata. But the most difficult task will be coming to grips with
> the realization that we no longer control the meaning of our
> expressions.
>

yep. QuickTime has complex metadata available, but it is not easy to
pull out. MPEG 7 and MPEG 21 are both much more sophisticated and are
designed specifically in terms of metadata schemas. blog systems
already encode considerable metadata, so it would be a case of having a
blog cms generate metadata that conformed to a MPEG 7 DTD (I'm assuming
MPEG 7 uses DTD's). This again is not technically difficult, building
tools that would utilise this also would not be an enormous challenge,
but like we've seen in these areas, it is as much about critical mass.
RSS reached a critical mass courtesy of blogs, but there is intense and
bitter debate within that community about rss, atom, and standards.
That debate is happening because it is worth fighting over, we're not
there yet, we need to make something that does it first 🙂 . gee, a
lab with a few comp. sci students would be *very very* nice for a
year…

cheers
Adrian Miles
………………………………………………………..
hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian
interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog
research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/