On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 10:34 -0400, Joe Gregorio wrote:
> On 10/10/07, Nathan Yergler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Creative Commons is currently working on implementation suggestions
> > for how people can indicate that additional permissions are available
> > outside the scope of a CC license. We've been referring to this as
> > CC+ ("CC Plus"). CC+ is a very simple system that associates a "more
> > permissions" URL with a work. Having this URL in a machine readable
> > format is very important.
> >
> > One file format we're looking at is the Atom syndication format, and
> > we have two different ideas for how we might implement this; I'm
> > seeking feedback regarding best practices. One option is to use link
> > with a custom rel; for example:
> >
> > <link rel="http://creativecommons.org/ns#morePermissions";
> > href="http://example.com/commercial_license_purchase"; />
>
> This is definitely the preferred option, as you can't guarantee
> that everyone can produce XHTML content.
You also can't guarantee that everyone can add <link> elements, let
alone ones with custom rel values.
Both link-with-custom-rel-value and custom-metadadata-in-content are
pretty poor from an adoption standpoint (not a criticism, nor even a
technology problem), unless you control both ends.
The question is really whether CC's recommendation should mention both
methods, or only one, and if only one, which. Because adoption
characteristics of both are bad, my bias is to recommend only one,
concentrating any implementations on that, and because I'm biased
against metadata that is very unlikely to be rendered for humans and
because my guess is far more real users will be able to publish XHTML in
content than will be able to add links, my bias is to recommend the
former.
But I encouraged Nathan to ask here in the hope that real experts would
smash my biases. :)
--
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Mike_Linksvayer
