How to destroy special collections with social media

Post by venomsnake » Sun, Aug 02, 2015, 12:49 PM UTC

joosters wrote: post #9

visarga wrote: post #7

I bemoan the disaster that is happening with the BBC archive of radio and TV (about 1,000,000 hours of content!) - they didn't manage to place it online completely, thus, it is not shared, commented upon, put in collections, and integrated into this living fabric that is the social media. In the meantime cat videos, art videos and all sorts oddities flood youtube, FB and reddit, and get the lion share of attention.

That's a little different - isn't the problem there that the copyright for each individual programme is unclear and may not be wholly owned by the BBC? As a result, it is difficult and time consuming to track down the owner of each programme to secure the online archival permissions. With the book collections in the original article, copyright is very clear. Their books are out of copyright and the collections own th…

Post by vsync » Sun, Aug 02, 2015, 1:24 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #13

sgk284 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contrast tends to be a balance. #000 on #FFF (or vice-versa) rarely ever occurs in nature. It also tends to strain eyes. Optimal contrast for most people tends to involve a dark grey, as seen on her website. The easiest design trick to make a website more reader friendly is to move a black font to a grey font. (Obviously there are exceptions and personal preference involved, such as yours)

>#000 on #FFF (or vice-versa) rarely ever occurs in nature. It also tends to strain eyes. Optimal contrast for most people tends to involve a dark grey, Is there actual scientific research that supports this? Most printed books have dark black ink instead of grey ink. (Although the paper of the pages may not be #FFF white but an off white.) In the office, the laser printers lay down dark black toner on crisp white pa…

Post by mrob » Sun, Aug 02, 2015, 2:00 PM UTC

vsync wrote: post #23

jasode wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>#000 on #FFF (or vice-versa) rarely ever occurs in nature. It also tends to strain eyes. Optimal contrast for most people tends to involve a dark grey, Is there actual scientific research that supports this? Most printed books have dark black ink instead of grey ink. (Although the paper of the pages may not be #FFF white but an off white.) In the office, the laser printers lay down dark black toner on crisp white pa…

Paper doesn't shine into your eyes. We also try to avoid staring into the sun, for the same reason.

Post by DanBC » Sun, Aug 02, 2015, 2:58 PM UTC

visarga wrote: post #7

I bemoan the disaster that is happening with the BBC archive of radio and TV (about 1,000,000 hours of content!) - they didn't manage to place it online completely, thus, it is not shared, commented upon, put in collections, and integrated into this living fabric that is the social media. In the meantime cat videos, art videos and all sorts oddities flood youtube, FB and reddit, and get the lion share of attention.

Post by detaro » Sun, Aug 02, 2015, 4:23 PM UTC

venomsnake wrote: post #21

joosters wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a little different - isn't the problem there that the copyright for each individual programme is unclear and may not be wholly owned by the BBC? As a result, it is difficult and time consuming to track down the owner of each programme to secure the online archival permissions. With the book collections in the original article, copyright is very clear. Their books are out of copyright and the collections own th…

First - archival should be the ultimate fair use. Because the explicit deal of copyright is - temporary monopoly vs public domain after its expiry, any attempt to prevent or not aid archiving is equal to directly depraving the public of what it is owned in the future.