Martin McEvoy wrote:
Hello
RE: 2008-01-10 hAudio notes inconsistency [1]
Raised by Andy Mabbett in
http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2008-January/011344.html
The "Notes" section of the hAudio spec says "By marking up audio
content with the hAudio microformat, the expectation is communicated
that information about the content MAY be indexed. This has no impact
on the copyright of the content itself which the publisher may
explicitly specify using rel-license as specified above.". However,
that is the first and only reference to rel-license on the page.
sorry:
[http://microformats.org/wiki/haudio-issues#D6:_2008-01-10_hAudio_notes_inconsistency]
I initially closed this issue marking it as a typing error rel-licence
is not part of the specification, but the question still remains
"should the hAudio Specification include rel-licence" I have
re-opened this issue in order that this issue be addressed correctly.
Proposed resolution:
The hAudio Specification SHOULD include the rel-license microformat.
1, because rel-licence already implicitly exists in haudio it
just hasn't been discussed yet.
2, I DO think it is valuable to know which audio files I can freely
download no conditions, and ones that may have certain conditions that
must be met before I can download this file.
Thanks
Martin McEvoy
_______________________________________________
microformats-new mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
