Saturday, April 22, 2006
Available free for a limited time on Google Video this independent film provides a good insight into the underlying situation that resulted in the killing of protesting refugees outside the UNHCR's office in Cairo in January 2006.
The director, Davin Hutchins, secretly used camcorders and a laptop to direct and edit the film which also looks at how "...financial support for Egypt by the U.S. has created an unsafe environment for Sudanese and Egyptian citizens alike" according to Hutchins.
Looking at the film from a different perspective, it manages to highlight some of the issues associated with the making of a Michael Moorish type production, even if the result in this case suffers from failing to document the UNHCR protest itself.
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Apr 18, 2006
Star Trek: New Voyages - Come What May
With a seemingly simple plot, in which the Enterprise is sent to investigate the distress call from a starbase research colony whose planet has been attacked by an unknown intruder, this first episode still manages to provide a good introduction to the world of Trekkers and fan-produced films.
The planned series, collectively known as Star Trek: New Voyages is intended to continue the "5 year mission" initiated in the TV series, but for which only three years worth were filmed.
Despite the somewhat wooden acting, and almost comical Captain Kirk quiff, "Come What May" is never-the-less a must see film for any serious Trekker, as-well-as being useful viewing for those interested to see what was technologically possible for fan films in January 2004 when this first episode was released.
Unfortunately the link to this episode appears to have been removed and the episode reclassified as a "pilot" episode. Other episodes will however follow…
Sunday, July 31, 2005
Saturday, July 30, 2005
Friday, July 29, 2005
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Monday, July 25, 2005
I've been looking at the microformats.org website and from their RelFAQ section about the "rel" attribute in hyperlinks, it looks as if the "rev" attribute would be more appropriate for rating tags. At the bottom of the FAQ page the final example using their VoteLinks micro format says:
"<a href="http://www2005.org" rev="vote-for">WWW2005 is a great conference</a>" should be interpreted as,
"The current document, as a proxy for the person who wrote it (e.g. the blogger whose blog it is), is a vote-for the resource indicated by http://www2005.org."This is quite close to a "rated tag" interpretation where...
"<a href="http://www2005.org" rev="rating:5outof5">conference</a>" would be interpreted as,
"The current document, as a proxy for the person who wrote it (e.g. the blogger whose blog it is), rated the resource indicated by http://www2005.org as 5 out of 5 against the criteria of 'conference'".One difference is that what I am calling the "tag", which in this case is "conference", is used as the criterion against which the rating is made. Also, in the original example the text of the link "WWW2005 is a great conference" represents to readers a positive assessment, but in the second example there is no representation of the rating for readers. I would anticipate that if the concept of "rated tags" were adopted tag clouds would be presented away from the body of any text. That is why I am playing around with the idea of representing the rating associated with the tag through the text size (with limited success as can be seen below - I'm aiming for a single line of tags in blue the size of which varies in accordance with the rating against that tag).