DaveJun 24

#namespace The <podcast:image> tag draft write-up:

https://github.com/Podcastindex-org/podcast-namespace/blob/image_tag/docs/tags/image.md

Included a new example (screenshot) apropos to current need.

This draft also formally deprecates the <podcast:images> tag. @theDanielJLewis I'm not sure how that would/should come across to podcasting2.org in a way that is a visible (colorful?) deprecation warning callout. I'm open to ideas on that. Just tell me what you need:

https://github.com/Podcastindex-org/podcast-namespace/blob/image_tag/docs/tags/images.md

@nathan Can you eyeball this for me and see if it works?

podcast-namespace/docs/tags/image.md at image_tag · Podcastindex-org/podcast-namespace

A wholistic rss namespace for podcasting. Contribute to Podcastindex-org/podcast-namespace development by creating an account on GitHub.

GitHub
Show threadDaveJun 24
Oops. Forgot to insert the screenshot:
Show threadDaniel J. LewisJun 24

@dave Why only a width? That tells nothing conclusive about an image. 4,320 could be landscape, square, or portrait.

Weren't we discussing an aspect ratio indicator instead of a single dimension?

Show threadDaveJun 24
@theDanielJLewis Did you read the spec?
Show threadDaveJun 24
@theDanielJLewis The purpose being set to "apple/hero" tells you what the aspect ratio is (4:1 according to their docs) so including it in the tag isn't necessary. Including the width isn't necessary either, but could be useful for UI hinting.
Show threadJames CridlandJun 25
@dave @theDanielJLewis I think it's not useful to show the width in an example here - the apple/showhero (its proper name) has a set height/width, so I think we can usefully not include either in any spec examples. That'll remove questions like Daniel's.
Show threadJames CridlandJun 25
@dave @theDanielJLewis It seems Apple has now named this Showcase Hero, and I'd recommend apple/showcase-hero as the "purpose" tag.
Show threadruisanJun 28
@james @dave @theDanielJLewis why using names defined by a company? Why not using something agnostic? What if any company disappears in the future?
Show threadJames CridlandJun 29
@ruisan @dave @theDanielJLewis Because the literal definition of the image size and layout is also defined by that company. I do not see any issue in doing that - it’s not the only image, but this particular image specification is authored by Apple.
Show threadDaniel J. LewisJun 29
@james @ruisan @dave Makes sense. I can see both sides.
Show threadDaveJul 1
@theDanielJLewis @james @ruisan Think of it as a pass-through value. You're saying, "there is an image spec defined by this certain app, and I want to provide it the thing it wants without having to go do a bunch of proprietary stuff on their portal".
Show threadDave
@theDanielJLewis @james @ruisan And, as a side benefit, others can see it publicly and might decide it's a nice format and pick it up as well - directly from the creator instead of having to scrape the proprietary platform's website.
Jul 1 at 7:44pmWeb