Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adding non-blog content #13

Open
drmowinckels opened this issue Nov 16, 2021 · 4 comments
Open

Adding non-blog content #13

drmowinckels opened this issue Nov 16, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@drmowinckels
Copy link
Member

In the initial discussions of adding to the blog list, (#1 ) we also came into discussing adding other types of content like videos etc.
We have a basic starting point with blogs, and we can build upon that as we go, when/if we decide on adding other types of content too.

@cosimameyer
Copy link
Contributor

I like the idea! I also thought of promoting YouTube videos (and chapter meetings' recordings?) with the Mastodon bot.

@drmowinckels
Copy link
Member Author

I think we can easily expand to youtube channels at least.

@cosimameyer
Copy link
Contributor

A quick update:
I added the functionality to the bot to process YouTube content and also added a new description how to add it to the Awesome repo. It comes with a new entry rss_feed_youtube. It assumes that people not necessarily have to have a blog/website, however but that a vlog (although it's not really a vlog - but it's content produced in a video format) is also ok ☺️
If you think it's a good idea, I'm happy to set up a PR with changes for this repo here as well ☺️

@drmowinckels
Copy link
Member Author

I love love love this! Thank you so much for the initiative!

I was wondering, does it have to have a rss_feed_youtube entry, or can it just be in the rss_feed section, but could be obvious if its a vlog through the entry category? I think it depends on how we want to handle this.

I think my initial idea would be that if a person has a blog and a vlog, they would get two entires. Since the content/cards are structured around content rather than authors (since we have multi-author options). So the data is for the content source, not the content author. Does that make sense?

In my case for instance, I'd have drmowinckels.io.json and youtube.com.drmowinckels.json (for youtube.com/@drmowinckels, skipping slashes and @ for neater file names).

I'm not married to this idea, but to me it makes more sense that each card is a single feed source, rather than author-centric.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants