solved Consistency in access and download permissions across media?

My impression from some recent play on my site is that the access and download permissions are not consistent across media, or at least are not presented in a consistent way.

This may reflect gradual development of the system for working with different media.

For previewing and downloading ebooks or journal issues (as pdf files, for example) through the Jamroom system it would be good to have an easily managed set of controls for access and downloads.

In my case, the entity that wishes to control access may be a text publishing company with a profile page in a quota dedicated to publishing journals or newsletters.

Jamroom might never be competitive with dedicated publishing platforms, but might be able to play a role in low-budget distribution for authors' PDF reprints, journal start-ups, and the like, or as site where publishers can provide sample texts for promotional purposes.

PS @michael

First, thanks for the reply...

I can't add a file in a response to your reply, for some reason, so will add it here as an update to the original message.

The attached file shows in summary the configuration options available in JR modules for the different common media of audio, file (usually document?), and image (static).

It is nice to be able to watermark images, but this would also be useful for audio and document files. Perhaps JR could invent a JR-specific water-sound watermark for sound files (?!).

The settings and controls are not the equivalent in the case of each media type, but could be, and seem best developed for sound.

For JR to be more useful for management and publishing of documents, it would be good to be able to organise documents into volumes (equivalent to albums) and to control access and downloading for preview and distribution purposes.

As explained in the document, audiovisual is different because the JR system is designed to integrate with Vimeo and Youtube, rather than attempting to duplicate those platforms.


--
PJ Matthews, Kyoto
Migrated from Ning 2.0. Now at Jamroom 6 beta and using Jamroom Hosting for The Research Cooperative (researchcooperative.org)
updated by @researchcooperative: 09/05/15 03:28:49AM

Its very hard to understand the issue without slightly more specific examples or use-cases. What I'm hearing is "I did something somewhere and somewhere else and it wasn't the same in both locations, but it should be."

Any more specific info would be great.

Thanks.

Thanks..

The attached pdf shows in summary the configuration options available in JR modules for the different common media of audio, 'file' (i.e. usually documents), and image (static).

It is nice to be able to watermark images, but this would also be useful for audio and document files. Perhaps JR could invent a JR-specific water-sound watermark for sound files (?!).

The settings and controls are not equivalent for each media type, but could be, and seem best developed for sound.

For JR to be more useful for management and publishing of documents, it would be useful to be able to organise documents into volumes (equivalent to albums) and to control access and downloading - for preview and distribution purposes.

I understand that audiovisual is different because the JR system is designed to integrate with Vimeo and Youtube (though maybe JR has developed it's own video channel display module, very recently).


--
PJ Matthews, Kyoto
Migrated from Ning 2.0. Now at Jamroom 6 beta and using Jamroom Hosting for The Research Cooperative (researchcooperative.org)

Thanks for the PDF, I like tables.

Watermarking sound files has been discussed and a way to merge a watermark into a sound file found:
https://www.jamroom.net/the-jamroom-network/forum/suggestions/5345/audio-snip-too-short#p5439

but it hasn't been made into a module by us. Not a particularly high priority because those the use-cases for it seam very limited.

--edit--
What would a watermark on a file download look like. Given that a file download could be anything from:
* a zip file
* an image file
* a pdf
* an mp3
* an mp4

updated by @michael: 08/06/15 12:12:43AM

I agree it would not be a high priority in most cases... just a thought. If someone was actually using a JR site as a publishing platform, they might want to embed all documents with a mark, but that can probably be done more effectively at an earlier stage by the word processor used to make an original document.

I am more concerned about how access is controlled for the end users of the different kinds of media distributed through a JR site. How far can and should the access controls be consistent across media and how can access be tailored for different user categories?


--
PJ Matthews, Kyoto
Migrated from Ning 2.0. Now at Jamroom 6 beta and using Jamroom Hosting for The Research Cooperative (researchcooperative.org)

You certainly can limit access to whoever you want based on whatever you want, but those whoever/however/whatever would need to be decided and built into a module.

Its the designing of how that system would work that would be the base of the module.

The foxycart module does it. It only allows download access to user who have gone through the purchase process.

Determining who gets access to what seams like it could be quite complicated in your instance.

Thanks. This is something I/we can think about later. I have more basic problems to deal with at present.

Cheers, P.


--
PJ Matthews, Kyoto
Migrated from Ning 2.0. Now at Jamroom 6 beta and using Jamroom Hosting for The Research Cooperative (researchcooperative.org)