Mike Linksvayer wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-09-05 at 15:53 -0700, James M Snell wrote:
>> Mike Linksvayer wrote:
>>> In any case, the draft says the referenced license only applies to feed
>>> or entry metadata, not content. This strikes me as not particularly
>>> useful and does not match analogous extentions for RSS 1.0 and RSS 2.0:
>> The difference in semantics is precisely why I'm not using either the
>> RSS 1.0 or RSS 2.0 extensions for this as I see problems with both the
>> former approaches.
>
> I understand having problems with RSS 1.0 and RSS 2.0 approaches but I
> don't see an inherent and important difference in semantics,
> particularly between Atom 1.0 and RSS 2.0. Of course my vision is
> probably foggy. :)
>
The difference boils down to one very simple point: contained resources
do not necessarily inherit the license of the container. The RSS 1.0
and RSS 2.0 modules both assume that the rights holder of the channel
also holds rights over all of the contained items, which works fine when
I'm publishing my own blogs entries in my own feed, but breaks down when
I'm republishing entries from multiple sources.
>[snip]
(I'm still stewing over the bit of comments that I snipped out of this
:-) ...)
> I agree that assuming entries inherit licenses specified at a feed level
> is problematic. My concern, at the feed and entry level, is that the
> atom license extension draft says that a link relation can (only) be
> used to associate a license with feed or entry metadata, rather than
> content. Unlike other children of <feed> and <entry> the license
> extension is not metadata for the feed or entry but metametadata for the
> feed or entry metadata, which strikes me as not particularly useful and
> contrary to both RSS 1.0 and RSS 2.0 modules, whatever differences exist
> between those.
>
My apologies if I haven't been clear on this. If you look again at
section 1.3, you should find the following:
For entry elements, "metadata" refers to the values and attributes of
the author, category, content, contributor, id, link, published,
rights, source, summary, title, and updated elements, as well as all
extension elements appearing as children of the entry element and all
elements appearing as children of the author and contributor
elements.
Note that the value and attributes of the content, summary, title, etc
elements are all included in entry "metadata". What isn't covered are
any linked resources. So any content actually appearing within the
entry is covered by the entry license.
(Note that paragaph 4 of section two will be removed in the next
iteration per Wendy's suggestion)
- James
