Well, should have realised what would happen. First of all I started the redesign in Tinderbox, partly because while in Forrest I have no internet (and I didn’t install MAMP before I left) and so Tinderbox is an environment I can work in. This turned into nearly 2 days of work as I’ve built the first version of the new site for the videos, though yet have started the very long and slow process of moving the video as well as making various new poster movies and what not. I’m still a bit torn as to whether I should have persevered in Tinderbox, but this is my current thinking.
First off, with Tinderbox I can have a complete copy of all the material on my laptop so have a back up (since it will be online, on the laptop and then also on the various backups that my laptop has). This also means I can write or make new content off line, have it all prepped and ready to be published when next I have a connection. With Tinderbox you write material and then use agents in combination with external HTML templates to export to HTML. This means I can do a lot of things, such as having a screen that is only video, build archives, and if I want (for example) to have a sidebar that shows random clips, or things from a year ago, or things that are related to a current video. I haven’t implemented any of these yet, right now it is bog standard, but what is nice with Tinderbox is that I can experiment and implement any of these things very easily. I don’t need plugins, I don’t need to worry about things breaking if a plugin is not updated, and instead of treating the site as a static place I can start using it as a place to prototype not only interactive online videos but also design implementations around publishing this sort of work.
Another advantage, though I’ll have to wait and see if the proof is in the pudding, is that when I use something like WordPress I usually have to make the interactive QuickTime, upload it and any associated files, then make the post and embed the video. I do know in advance what the URL of the video will be, but if, for example, I use the style that I’ve been playing with it wants a thumbnail and that thumbnail is going who knows where. With Tinderbox I can have a simple location for the video and then I can use relative URLs for nearly everything, which should, in theory, make it very simple to relocate the entire site if I want to. Now of course, these days, this is not hard to do in something like WordPress but what I’m also talking about are the internal links to the embedded media. Also, since I’ll have the material sitting as a TinderBox document (which is XML), static HTML and the media assets all to hand it means I can move it to another CMS. Perhaps.
One issue that will turn up, and I don’t yet know of a solution, is that my videos vary in size and shape enormously. The very first video post I made, in November 2000, is only 194 x 144 pixels in size, yet what I want to be able to do is show clips in each of the archive/category views and I’ve defined that as a size of 320 x 180 pixels. So what to do with the earlier works? Actually, a work round would be to do a screen capture at 320 x 240 while playing the movie. That’s a good idea!
Finally, the archive and category views will show videos which will be micromovs. These will be 1 frame per second 320 x 240 copies of the actual videos that will play when you mouse in, pause when you mouse out, and if you click on them they’ll take you to their individual entry. For new ones I’ll include the sound track, but for the older ones where the sound might be elsewhere I won’t worry about it.
There are no comments, but comments in a blog are a sideshow more than a contribution or integral to blogging. More significantly there is no trackback so links to individual posts won’t be able to ping each other for notification, but I can look after than manually using referrer stats from the site, though not sure I’ll bother.
Tags:
Network Literacy,
practice