http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2008/04/shapes_of_things_to_come.shtml en-gb 30 Tue 15 Dec 2009 23:00:49 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2008/04/shapes_of_things_to_come.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2008/04/shapes_of_things_to_come.shtml?page=15#comment3 I'd argue that the versions in PIPs are also editorial, but you do have to careful how they are exposed in audience facing UIs.We have to flatten production versions to create the audience facing ones (signed, shortened, etc). Wed 23 Apr 2008 20:42:57 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2008/04/shapes_of_things_to_come.shtml?page=10#comment2 It's kind of an editorial / audience vs production distinction. In the editorial world episodes are items and series / brands are groups of items. But PIPs models down to versions - it's versions that are broadcast, versions that appear in iplayer etc. Episodes group versions, series + brands group episodes. So episodes, series and brands are all just groups. Wed 23 Apr 2008 19:49:56 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2008/04/shapes_of_things_to_come.shtml?page=5#comment1 Whilst they initially look like three separate things, brands, series and episodes are all editorial grouping constructs that have pretty much the same metadata.This is also the approach taken by TV-Anytime, where what we call brands, series and episodes are represented by GroupInformation elements of type show, series and programConcept. Tue 22 Apr 2008 21:28:42 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2008/04/shapes_of_things_to_come.shtml?page=0#comment0 I still don't get the logic behind having both Episodes and Series/Brands in the same table. Surely they're completely different beasts? Tue 22 Apr 2008 11:02:39 GMT+1