-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 116
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
<podcast:person> loose ends? #96
Comments
LGTM! |
Are there going to be guidelines for the image size/shape and or the bio format? |
Is there bits/pieces that can be borrowed from the FOAF (Friend-o-a-Friend) specification (http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/)? It's to describe persons/people and what relation they have. |
Definitely image size/shape. Bio format seems like just a link for now. Wikipedia, IMDB, etc. |
Yes. As written. Suggestion for Images (following Apple's artwork specs):Size: square; minimum 600 x 600 pixels and maximum 1200 x 1200 pixels (preferred) |
Forgot to mention, also Podchaser credits. |
Actually, I'm rethinking this a bit. I may actually be in favor of leaving it the way it's currently documented on the README.md.
The only reason I'm thinking this may be better is that the name of the person is actually content; something a human would read and understand. At the end of the day though, this is not a big deal. I'm fine with @daveajones just picking one so we can build it out. |
I don't care either. Let's keep it the way it is then. I agree with that sentiment. Let this fester for a few more days and if nothing else comes up we can go ahead and set it in stone? |
It would be valuable to allow for multiple links to identifiying URIs, be they social media accounts, a Wikipedia page or a Podchaser Creator Profile - this would allow for the consuming platform to use whichever verification method they feel comfortable with to disambiguate people, as well as providing more options for linking out to useful pages for a specific person. It's not quite as neat, but something like:
We could probably remove the |
Here are the roles put together by the Podcast Taxonomy Consortium as well - it's still getting a few edits but it's mostly complete. I'm not sure if this belongs in the spec or not, but it was put together so that we have a known set of possible roles for credits on a podcast. |
This is so extensive. It seems like it would belong in it's own element consideration. Like podcast:credits with a link to an extensive credits file that an app could pull in. |
It's a good idea in principle. But, man that adds a lot of complexity, considering there could be multiple persons with multiple links. Seems like a lot of overhead. I feel like apps would most prefer Podchaser and then have fallbacks. Independent podcast apps would probably avoid IMDB since it's Amazon. |
Heaven forbid could there be a podcastIndex solution? I like podchaser, but some day it might get bought out and i don't think I have had a single guest that has a podchaser profile. At the start people search for a host or guest, they don't find it, they get a unique link, a plane one, like bit.ly. As the ecosystem grows it turns out that one person is actually listed twice, with two links. Well the system is setup so that the two people are merged into one, but the two links always resolve to that person. One link is designate the primary one and is only given out going forward. There is probably some level of maintenance required in this though to resolve disputes. The service could then be used to record the other links, imdb, twitter, podchaser etc People are starting to use linktree to sorta do this already, i don't know if one could suggest a standard way for a podcaster? |
Since there is still ongoing discussion here, I say we boot This is an important tag though, so I'd really like to have it and location be main focuses for phase 2. I think we all knew these would be the most complex. |
I think it's important to take our time on this, Dave, and I'd support moving this to phase 2. @bslinger I think it would be important for us to, where we can, support the podcast taxonomy consortium's work where possible. Podjobs.net will certainly be doing so, and I know that Podchaser also has plans to do so. And I don't think it's too complicated to add to this spec to do this either. Currently, we support "host" and "guest".
How about
For phase 2, we CamelCase-ify the taxonomy data, so that we use identical words to them. This allows this tag to be used for everyone working on the podcast, and identical data to Podchaser and others. This is a good thing. So, my tags might be
This has the benefit of aligning with the taxonomy work, which is important, as well as remaining entirely backwards-compatible with a simpler plan that just says "host". Here's the full list, so they're visible without fiddling about with unzipping a CSV file:
|
@douglaskastle @daveajones In terms of different URLs for people. There is a This allows one link to be placed in the RSS, and then the Further - if I were to I don't know if it's entirely relevant here, but it does seem to fix the issue we're trying to fix. |
I like all of this James. This is very thorough. Is the Podcast Taxonomoy Consortium's work stable enough, at this point, to feel confident that it wouldn't change drastically out from under us structure-wise? @bslinger It looks like Podchaser is heading that up? |
I suppose the important thing to achieve is to allow for the ability to separate two people with the same name from the same person being listed twice. Also the goal, from my assessment, is that it is finding people as guests is the harder part, as they may be jumping around to podcasts is variable states of namespace support than if you are the host of your own, there is less churn in the host, in general. The rel="me" look exactly like the start of the solution some where a person can maintain control. It is fairly trivial to add it to ones own podcast, it might take a bit of professional dedication if one is a guest to get the podcast in question to put it up correctly, it is early days yet. However I am still trying to figure out how it is possible to improve the tag to enhance search. Currently it seems that search on people name is a haphazard regex into the show title or show notes which i am sure results in a lot of false positives. Maybe just getting the name in the tag it improves the data separation enough to make it practically useful again for search, who cares if it show two people with the same name, or the same person listed twice, as long as it is showing them. |
"Currently it seems that search on people name is a haphazard regex into the show title or show notes which i am sure results in a lot of false positives" Yep, it's just a train wreck. I really haven't even bothered trying for a guest search until we get something nailed down here because I just don't trust that the results will be compelling. "The rel="me" look exactly like the start of the solution some where a person can maintain control. It is fairly trivial to add it to ones own podcast, it might take a bit of professional dedication if one is a guest to get the podcast in question to put it up correctly, it is early days yet." - The good part about this is that the guest themselves will probably be plenty motivated to make that happen and make sure it's right. Nobody wants to guest on a show and then be misattributed. Maybe this will be self-solving? Seems like it will. |
Curious I found
|
That seems odd. I can’t find anything in the rel=“me” microformats spec to justify linking back to an apple podcasts page. I wonder if that’s just a sane default in case some other, more specific value isn’t entered. |
The Google Podcasts actually uses similar - if you link to your homepage from your RSS feed, and your RSS feed from your homepage, then that offers a bit more certainty that it really is you. They don't use the Another construction here is the schema.org sameAs, which for Podnews looks like this: <script type="application/ld+json">
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "Podnews LLC",
"url": "https://podnews.net",
"logo": "https://podnews.net/f/favicon-180x180.png",
"foundingDate": "2017",
"founders": [
{
"@type": "Person",
"name": "James Cridland",
"givenName": "James",
"familyName": "Cridland"
}],
"contactPoint": [{
"@type": "ContactPoint",
"email": "[email protected]",
"url": "https://podnews.net",
"contactType": "customer service"
}],
"sameAs": [
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/podnews",
"https://twitter.com/Podnews",
"https://www.facebook.com/podnews"
]
}
</script> Both of these are ways that we can suggest that one link is used per person, but that a podcast search engine may elect to spider the links used to help match individuals. We should recommend the use of Linktree, and similar, are perfect targets for this. @bslinger I notice that https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/podnews-podcasting-news-612989 doesn't |
I understand the concerns about relying on Podchaser, but we (Podchaser) are putting in the work to solve a lot of these issues - the whole point of our creator database is to allow for disambiguation and more structured metadata about who is doing what on what show. Eg. on the subject of guest searching, we regularly search all of our episodes for the names of every creator in our database and have a team of moderators looking at the results and deciding whether it's actually an appearance by that person or just somebody mentioning them. A "PodcastIndex solution" would presumably require something similar to get similar results unless there is some additional innovation involved that we haven't thought of. As I mentioned earlier, I have no issues with making it optional, and if it's built in the right way it could be left open to any other service that wants to jump in and provide the ability to do some sort of identity verification. @jamescridland , the |
@bslinger I wouldn't want to build something on PI unless it was necessary (i.e. if Podchaser decided to exit that work). My bigger concern is whether the taxonomy project is stable enough now to consider referencing it as James mentions. Building on that naming convention seems like a good way to go, but only if it's not too early in the game. I think we really want to get a guest/host tag out the door by the end of the year. Do you know if the taxonomy project is at a point yet where we could start referencing it's cast nomenclature without risk of it changing out from under us? |
I agree here with the sentiment of keeping this simple but also wanting the ability for more roles. Feel like producer, donor, sponsor, cast roles are all very valuable even if not surfaced in most players. As you expand that, there's even more of a need for a |
At this point can the tag proposal change just include a reference to the taxonomy project roles list as the standard, and a link back to any page for the person in the spirit of Is that enough to get us back on track? If so, I can write it up and we can use that as a new starting point. |
Stability - are you looking for stability in the mechanism of referring to a position by using the equivalent of a "Group Name" and "Position Title" (what we're calling Cole Raven of Podchaser, who works with @bslinger , appears to be the driving force behind the taxonomy project. Since August, I've been looking into it from afar, though missed the last group call. I hope that Ben might be able to raise his awareness of this thread - I have put something into the Slack group a while back. I shall also mail Cole directly and hope he takes part here. Without speaking for Cole, my understanding is that the concept of a "Group Name" and "Position Title" is stable (it's always been part of the documents shared around). I'd also guess that the actual values of those are, given the nascent industry that podcasting is in, not ever going to be 'stable'. The "official first draft" is due on November 20th; and Cole, in his email, says:
My suggestion is that Podcast Index recommends, at the very least, To that end, if the requirement for "stability" is a requirement that 'host', 'guest' and 'cast' are immutable and stable, I think that would be achievable. |
Excellent. That answers my questions. I think we can definitely do that. Podcastindex will definitely support the taxonomy projects work. I’ll make the change to the tag as you’ve outlined and we can use that as a base to move forward. If anything changes when the draft is released that would modify that we can address it then. Thank you @jamescridland |
I'd like to see the roles mentioned here also reflected in value tags for sharing value. |
@jamescridland If we do it in one place, we should also make the change here so that the name is displayed as the node value, like this: #138 (comment) |
[New here, jumping in late, apologies] Why do we need a If any calculation is needed, |
Hi, @stuartjmoore - the role/group is specifically set so that this is machine-readable as well as humanly-readable. It's from The Podcast Taxonomy group - who would be very happy to learn of any omissions. I'd have sidekicks/dropguys as a co-host, personally. |
Is there a reason to make it machine readable? I worry it won’t scale. And maintaining a taxonomy list sounds impossible. |
"Show me all executive producers of podcasts in Turkish" "Show me any podcast host who's done a show about Disneyland"
Thankfully, we don't need to worry about that. That's what the Podcast Taxonomy group is for: all we need to do is follow their lead. |
@stuartjmoore Thanks for getting involved Stuart. The way the tag is written is to have sane defaults for role and group so that 90+% of the time those attributes aren’t even needed. It’ll be the rare podcast that wants to specify “audio engineer” in their “person” tag. But if they do, they can. But if you just want “host” or “guest” it’s dead simple. We tried to write it so that it can scale up and down in complexity. |
I’m loving everything, so I hope I don’t sound like a nay-sayer. I’ve even tried to start my own podcasting standard more than once dating back to 2009. My general goal when engineering is to build it up complexly, then tear it back down to simplicity, removing redundancy, and opening it up to scale. I don’t think the taxonomy is a bad idea; I was more curious if there was a goal for the added complexity. If the field is open to custom strings—and not restricted to an enumeration—it fits both our goals 👍🏻 |
I know I'm a bit late, given this is already Phase 2, however I'd like to share with you what we worked on. I guess it could be difficult to add it later in the spec without compatibilities issues, because of the name of the person being the content of the tag. On our parallel work on podCloud/podcast-ext (soon dead and replaced by podcast-namespace) we intended to allow That would let us do something like this. <podcast:person role="host" group="cast" img="[uri]" href="[maybe some "main" link]" name="Pof Magicfingers">
<podcast:social platform="twitter" url="https://twitter.com/pofmagicfingers">@PofMagicfingers</podcast:social>
<podcast:social platform="github" url="https://github.com/pofmagicfingers"/>
<!-- Proposal for this generic link is #176 -->
<podcast:link href="https://jaimelegif.com">Thomas project website</podcast:link>
</podcast:person> Also in our spec we planned to support a more precise "identity" for the person, including firstname, lastname, nickname, and pronoun (from a community fixed list). Those would be optional but could be a good thing when implemented by clients. <podcast:person firstname="Giovanni" lastname="Olivera" nickname="PofMagicfingers" pronoun="he" /> Let me now what you think of these ideas, and if we could/should salvage them merging them on this tag proposal, or maybe in some other way. |
I like Given that shows, episodes, and people are all nouns, it make sense for them all to act similarly and share attributes. |
Hey that could be cool, I think this is technically possible to allow original tags to be children of ours. |
One thing we've consistently heard from hosting companies is that they are worried about tag bloat in the feed. Every extra bit of tag ends up adding bandwidth for a host that has tens of thousands of feeds. So, with each step we've tried to keep it as lean as possible. One of the things that caused us to move the name value into the node instead of an attribute was the need for displaying the value in an XSL style template, which is very common among hosting companies. This tag (and the location tag) took a ton of work and arguing (this isn't the only thread on this 😊) to get to the point they're at now, so I'm hesitant to mess with it. These are good ideas though. So, I think we can revisit this for an expansion/enhancement after we see how things go in the real world. Part of this project from the beginning has been the idea that we would bolt on new features to tags in future releases. So, I think that's the best way to handle. |
Yeah sure, no worries. We also are a hosting company and have thousands of feeds, so I'm all ear for these arguments. I stilled had to brought up our thoughs on this tag "just in case", but I'm pretty happy with your version. PS : You actually can use attributes in XSL, but I still also prefer the name as text content for simplicity. |
Just came across this at Apple https://help.apple.com/itc/podcastshostandguestimageguidelines/en.lproj/static.html and https://itunespartner.apple.com/podcasts/articles/hosts-and-guests-3085 I'm wondering if in the person tag everything is "there" so that it would work with this description? . |
I think this document works for special podcast pages with special
agreements with Apple. I'm pretty sure there is no official way in the rss
feed to have your hosts and guests info in Apple Podcast, but I could be
wrong.
Anyhow, it can be interesting to keep that content in mind when documenting
our tag picture guidelines, I guess.
… Just came across this at Apple
https://help.apple.com/itc/podcastshostandguestimageguidelines/en.lproj/static.html
and
https://itunespartner.apple.com/podcasts/articles/hosts-and-guests-3085
I'm wondering if in the person tag everything is "there" so that it would
work with this description?
.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#96 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADST7KLQ47YBYI36VIXL5DS5FQ3XANCNFSM4TG5XH2Q>
.
|
I'm in Apple Podcasts as a 'person'. You need to know the right people and ask the right questions - you then email them with an image which needs to have a specific naming convention. You probably also need to invite your friends into a circle, turn off all the lights, have eight candles, and chant your allegiance to the one true visionary Steve Jobs fifteen times, and then successfully log into Podcasts Connect. Most people fail at the last hurdle. (It's a proprietary thing for Apple only. But no harm in stealing their spec in terms of image sizes.) |
The loose end I have is the current lack of an option to tag/flag a "Location" for a podcast "Person". As I see it, I may want to search on podcasts created by those living in certain places. Something like podcast:personLocation or similar. It would replicate the already agreed podcast:location formatting so there's nothing else to add/modify in that regard. |
"Location" is not for 'created in a certain place', or even 'podcast from a certain place', it is for 'editorial about a certain place'. Unless we wish to widen the scope of the location tag, I wouldn't support adding a location tag to a person element. The location tag can be used for a specific show where that show is about a place ("The Fortitude Valley Podcast") or a thing ("The Brisbane Wheel") but if it's a show about podcasting news, for example, the fact it comes from Bardon QLD is not the intended use for the location tag. The original spec for the location tag had a rel="from" or rel="about" tag, but it was quite strongly argued against for what must have been good reasons at the time. |
There are two debates to be had: 1) should there be a way to add the location of a creator to their personal profile in a searchable way; 2) whether the intent of the existing location tag should change. My suggestion isn't the latter, it's the former. I'm open to a discussion over whether that adds value or not as it relates to the person tag. I'm curious if anyone thinks this information has value. |
I guess my concern is: "location is intended to communicate editorial about a certain place, unless its within a person tag, in which case location is that person's home city" is a little messy. I've focused on the past on "hear all podcasts about breweries in Queensland", which is where the Is there a use-case in "hear all podcasts made by people who live in Logan City"? I'm not sure, but could be convinced. |
I think there should be the possibility to store the following locations, each in different degrees of detail (Country, Region, City, ...).
Not everything fits into the location tag (that, in my eyes, would be the first and third), but the person related location information should be tied to the person record. OSM is in my eyes tied to much to Open Streetmap, there are location based ways to record a position or area (based on standards, like lat/long). Can we agree on this? . |
Sure, multiple tags rel="from" or rel="about" (i.e. "I'm in Brisbane, but this podcast is about Sydney") is absolutely fine from a tech point of view. I'd question how bloated we want to make the Also for a person - surely this, along with lots of other data, could be programmatically divined from the suggested Podchaser link, or Twitter link, or similar? If someone is from New York, should this data be available once, or in two hundred different podcast RSS feeds?
OSM is a standard, and the APIs to OpenStreetMap are open, and the data is available free with attribution. It's always used in the location tag as an addition to the geo tag, which includes lat/lon (and altitude, and a geospace like "Earth"). OSM allows you to say "This is about the Eiffel Tower in Paris" (which is a tourist attraction, and a tower, and in this arrondisement, and is called Tour d'Eiffel in French) rather than "this is about 2.38734234,12.3826323" which only refers to a specific point on the planet. If we don't have the option of using OSM here, we're reduced to specific points on the planet rather than the ability to describe places properly. That would be disappointing, since it kills the potential of "podcasts about tourist attractions in France" and instead only allows you to search for "podcasts about places in Paris" which is much less rich. I'm proud that the Anyway - I think I'll bow out of this; but would really rather we don't a) reopen the |
Just wanted to mention https://schema.org/Place and https://schema.org/GeospatialGeometry which could be a model we could use. I think OSM ist not a "real" standard. . |
James, from my original post/note I stated: "...it would be better to have that embedded in the non-Podchaser future-state format..." for which I agree - I don't think it should be replicated. Therefore in the interests of solving a potential issue, should a non-Podchaser format be the next thing to consider, of which the podcasters location should belong. And if that's the case, then it's only tangentially related to the podcast:person tag insofar as we reference that identity link rather than podchaser. |
Couldn't find if this was addressed anywhere, but what happens with persons with multiple roles? Do we output them multiple times for each role (not ideal), or do we comma separate the roles in the role tag? |
Right now it would be multiple outputs. We can always revise in a future spec to allow for comma separated roles. |
Are we comfortable with this format to talk about finalizing, or are there any loose ends that need to be hammered out?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: