Video UID (Unique identifier)

[Zuko]

Hi,

Firstly can't thank enough for bring in such great standard.


What i have missed is providers Video UID (Unique identifier)

e.g.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFnXm6cjGwU (UID=UFnXm6cjGwU)
http://vimeo.com/17853047 (UID=17853047)

This will help users to find UID with ease for every provider instead
of doing all regex work. Also users will able to maintain non-
duplication of content.

I would like to your opinion on this.

[Charl van Niekerk]

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Zuko <zack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What i have missed is providers Video UID (Unique identifier)
>
> e.g.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFnXm6cjGwU (UID=UFnXm6cjGwU)
> http://vimeo.com/17853047 (UID=17853047)
>
> This will help users to find UID with ease for every provider instead
> of doing all regex work. Also users will able to maintain non-
> duplication of content.
>
> I would like to your opinion on this.

Personally I have just been using the full URL as the identifier but
this doesn't work that well in the case of canonical URLs. Splitting
the URL up might have some advantages but you would really need two
parts of the identifier, one for the video itself (like UFnXm6cjGwU or
17853047) and one for the scope of that (youtube or vimeo). You could
maybe use provider_url for the latter.

[Zuko]

On Dec 18, 5:00 pm, Charl van Niekerk <char...@charlvn.com> wrote:

Yeah, at the moment even i have similar setup and will have continue
even when we will have UID provided thru OEMBED. As UID might not be
unique in case of all providers. Essential we have to maintain
provider_name and UID. But extracting UID is such pain with ever
evolving provider setups.

[Charl van Niekerk]

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Zuko <zack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, at the moment even i have similar setup and will have continue
> even when we will have UID provided thru OEMBED. As UID might not be
> unique in case of all providers. Essential we have to maintain
> provider_name and UID. But extracting UID is such pain with ever
> evolving provider setups.

Personally I would prefer just having a normalised link back to the
original web document. Then this can also be used to link back to the
source in a clean way without actually carrying through any extra
parameters such as "feature=topvideos" etc...