On 18/11/14 08:51, David Thompson wrote: > Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro <[email protected]> writes: > >> Em Mon, 17 Nov 2014 16:13:16 +0100 >> [email protected] (Ludovic Courtès) escreveu: >> >>> I’d rather remove the table altogether, unless LibreJS really uses it. >> >> LibreJS *really* needs it. JavaScript License Web Labels is the >> preferred, and practical, method for labeling third party scripts as >> free [0]. >> >>> And even if LibreJS uses it, I’d rather make it invisible. >> >> Wouldn't that defeat one of the purposes of the method's design? >> People should have easy access to the source code of the programs they >> are running. If we hide the table, people won't easily find the source >> code. So, what would be the purpose of stating them as free in the >> first place? >> >> I think the best solution is to make a separate page >> 'javascript.html' with the table, and put a small, but prominent, >> LibreJS logo linking to that page, like I did for my personal web site. > > I think moving the weblabels table to a separate page would be good. It > clutters the page footer. If users *really* want to see the licenses > and links to individual source files, they can click a link in the > footer that brings them to the table. However, LibreJS exists because > most users *aren't* going to check that the JavaScript is free before > running it, so we automate the process. > > I understand the rationale for weblabels, but I think they are a bad > technical decision that has caused me lots of annoying issues when they > mysteriously don't work. I would much prefer a terse JSON > representation of this data intended for a program to read. Why scrape > a web page when you have other options? Why enforce markup restrictions > on web developers? > > Sorry for the rant. >
I couldn't agree more with you :) -- Luis Felipe López Acevedo http://sirgazil.bitbucket.org/ PGP Klefo ID : 0x8A296B99 Fingrala marko: 7ED8 4963 C881 647C 9DA0 FDE6 881B 91ED 8A29 6B99
