Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio
Martin McEvoy wrote: Hello Toby... Toby A Inkster wrote: For the purposes of illustration, say I'm writing an article entitled Music in the Digital Age discussing how the Internet has changed modern music. I may wish to write that: ... span class=haudio span class=contributorNine Inch Nails/span released their recent album span class=albumGhosts I-IV/span under a a href=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/; rel=licenseCreative Commons license/a /span Now, an hAudio parser (of which there are few) will interpret this as meaning that the Nine Inch Nails' album is released under that licence. But a general rel=license parser (of which there are many, including Yahoo! (cc) Search, Google Usage Rights Search, and absolutely any RDFa parser) will interpret this as meaning that the whole page is available under that licence, which may not be the case. With rel-tag, the scoping issue is of less importance. If I want to tag, say, a particular hCard with a tag of Tennis because that person is a tennis player, it is not too unreasonable if the whole page is interpreted as being tagged Tennis - after all, the page does mention a tennis player, so does have an (albeit perhaps minor) topic of Tennis. With rel-license scoping has potentially major legal ramifications. Essentially it means that any rel=license link found needs to be manually checked to determine exactly what the licence applies to. And if one needs to manually inspect a page to determine its licence, then rel=license is adding no value. This is true, I would prefer to use rel=copyright http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/types.html#type-links because rel=licence is primarily used for CC licences. But even so the problem still exists that the rel-copyright still only applies to the entire document. So *maybe* there is need for something more specific that can be related to the object maybe a rel=rights or something else new..? No Im wrong hAudio *can* use rel=copyright http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-faq#Are_rel_attributes_and_linktypes_in_general_just_document_to_document Are rel attributes, and linktypes in general, just document to document? The vast majority of the rel values defined in HTML4 are from a document to a document. rel=stylesheet is a bit of an exception, as it from an HTML document to a style sheet, which is more like a set of styling rules and instructions than a document in the classical sense. Two more notable exceptions are rel=copyright and rel=bookmark which describe the relationship from the current document to (potentially) only part of a document. Proposal: change rel=licence to rel=copyright I would have proposed rev=copyright but rev is depreciated in Microformats (which is a shame in this case because it looks like something hAudio needs) Thanks Martin McEvoy Thanks Martin McEvoy ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio
Hello Toby... Toby A Inkster wrote: For the purposes of illustration, say I'm writing an article entitled Music in the Digital Age discussing how the Internet has changed modern music. I may wish to write that: ... span class=haudio span class=contributorNine Inch Nails/span released their recent album span class=albumGhosts I-IV/span under a a href=http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/; rel=licenseCreative Commons license/a /span Now, an hAudio parser (of which there are few) will interpret this as meaning that the Nine Inch Nails' album is released under that licence. But a general rel=license parser (of which there are many, including Yahoo! (cc) Search, Google Usage Rights Search, and absolutely any RDFa parser) will interpret this as meaning that the whole page is available under that licence, which may not be the case. With rel-tag, the scoping issue is of less importance. If I want to tag, say, a particular hCard with a tag of Tennis because that person is a tennis player, it is not too unreasonable if the whole page is interpreted as being tagged Tennis - after all, the page does mention a tennis player, so does have an (albeit perhaps minor) topic of Tennis. With rel-license scoping has potentially major legal ramifications. Essentially it means that any rel=license link found needs to be manually checked to determine exactly what the licence applies to. And if one needs to manually inspect a page to determine its licence, then rel=license is adding no value. This is true, I would prefer to use rel=copyright http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/types.html#type-links because rel=licence is primarily used for CC licences. But even so the problem still exists that the rel-copyright still only applies to the entire document. So *maybe* there is need for something more specific that can be related to the object maybe a rel=rights or something else new..? Thanks Martin McEvoy ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio
Toby A Inkster wrote: With rel-license scoping has potentially major legal ramifications. Essentially it means that any rel=license link found needs to be manually checked to determine exactly what the licence applies to. And if one needs to manually inspect a page to determine its licence, then rel=license is adding no value. This is a very good point, Toby. It is an argument against using rel=license in the current version of hAudio since the semantics do not match up with what is intended. Namely: By adding rel=license to a hyperlink, a page indicates that the destination of that hyperlink is a license for the current page.[1] However, to give a counter-point, Creative Commons notes that rel=license should be used to specify what music a particular work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/license/music Their approach has the musical work(s) described on a page as the only content on that page, so rel=license makes a little more sense in their use case. This would also make sense in the hAudio case, but has a very high probability of abuse. The XHTML vocabulary also defines rel=license as applying to the current document and not to resources in the document. http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#license Keep in mind that this is a non-issue in RDFa since you always have a subject, which is why it is supported in Audio RDFa[2]. If we do want to specify the license for Microformatted objects in the future, we should pick something else, like rel=hlicense to specify the relationship between a Microformat object and it's license. However, hAudio does not have enough examples of specifying the license to warrant this addition to the Microformat. -- manu [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-license#Abstract [2] http://purl.org/media/audio ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio
Manu, Martin, in brief, please do not propose/introduce/suggest new formats (hlicense, rel copyright etc) without at a minimum checking the wiki for work in progress regarding the limitations of rel-license. http://microformats.org/wiki/license Thanks, Tantek -Original Message- From: Manu Sporny [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:44:11 To: For discussion of new microformats.microformats-new@microformats.org Subject: Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio Toby A Inkster wrote: With rel-license scoping has potentially major legal ramifications. Essentially it means that any rel=license link found needs to be manually checked to determine exactly what the licence applies to. And if one needs to manually inspect a page to determine its licence, then rel=license is adding no value. This is a very good point, Toby. It is an argument against using rel=license in the current version of hAudio since the semantics do not match up with what is intended. Namely: By adding rel=license to a hyperlink, a page indicates that the destination of that hyperlink is a license for the current page.[1] However, to give a counter-point, Creative Commons notes that rel=license should be used to specify what music a particular work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/license/music Their approach has the musical work(s) described on a page as the only content on that page, so rel=license makes a little more sense in their use case. This would also make sense in the hAudio case, but has a very high probability of abuse. The XHTML vocabulary also defines rel=license as applying to the current document and not to resources in the document. http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#license Keep in mind that this is a non-issue in RDFa since you always have a subject, which is why it is supported in Audio RDFa[2]. If we do want to specify the license for Microformatted objects in the future, we should pick something else, like rel=hlicense to specify the relationship between a Microformat object and it's license. However, hAudio does not have enough examples of specifying the license to warrant this addition to the Microformat. -- manu [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-license#Abstract [2] http://purl.org/media/audio ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio
Hello Manu Manu Sporny wrote: Toby A Inkster wrote: With rel-license scoping has potentially major legal ramifications. Essentially it means that any rel=license link found needs to be manually checked to determine exactly what the licence applies to. And if one needs to manually inspect a page to determine its licence, then rel=license is adding no value. This is a very good point, Toby. It is an argument against using rel=license in the current version of hAudio since the semantics do not match up with what is intended. Namely: By adding rel=license to a hyperlink, a page indicates that the destination of that hyperlink is a license for the current page.[1] However, to give a counter-point, Creative Commons notes that rel=license should be used to specify what music a particular work is licensed under: http://creativecommons.org/license/music Their approach has the musical work(s) described on a page as the only content on that page, so rel=license makes a little more sense in their use case. This would also make sense in the hAudio case, but has a very high probability of abuse. The XHTML vocabulary also defines rel=license as applying to the current document and not to resources in the document. http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#license Keep in mind that this is a non-issue in RDFa since you always have a subject, which is why it is supported in Audio RDFa[2]. If we do want to specify the license for Microformatted objects in the future, we should pick something else, like rel=hlicense to specify the relationship between a Microformat object and it's license. However, hAudio does not have enough examples of specifying the license to warrant this addition to the Microformat. You are right Manu In fact only a handful of the audio-info-examples make any reference at all to a licence of any kind so for hAudio rel=licence is out of scope for haudio at this time, but Its good to talk these things through. Is it safe to say that I can re-close issue D6: 2008-01-10 hAudio notes inconsistency [1] ? (if thats ok with everyone else that is?) [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/haudio-issues#D6:_2008-01-10_hAudio_notes_inconsistency Thanks Martin McEvoy -- manu [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-license#Abstract [2] http://purl.org/media/audio ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio
Tantek Celik wrote: Manu Sporny wrote: If we do want to specify the license for Microformatted objects in th future, we should pick something else, like rel=hlicense to specify the relationship between a Microformat object and it's license. Manu, Martin, in brief, please do not propose/introduce/suggest new formats (hlicense, rel copyright etc) without at a minimum checking the wiki for work in progress regarding the limitations of rel-license. Just to be clear, I wasn't attempting to propose/introduce/suggest a new format. I was attempting to state that we'd need something else, something other than rel=license if we are to address this issue for Microformats. I was also attempting to point out that this is a non-issue for hAudio at the present because there are not enough examples to warrant the need for stating the license of an hAudio object. The latter of the two statements should close hAudio Issue D6, we should not support rel=license in hAudio: http://microformats.org/wiki/haudio-issues#D6:_2008-01-10_hAudio_notes_inconsistency -- manu ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio
rel-license predates Atom and thus the reference should go the other direction. That being said, iterations on rel-license and any work on new licensing formats should reference Atom license as an existing format and take its semantics into consideration. Tantek -Original Message- From: Martin McEvoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:54:09 To: For discussion of new microformats.microformats-new@microformats.org Subject: Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio Manu Sporny wrote: Just to be clear, I wasn't attempting to propose/introduce/suggest a new format. I was attempting to state that we'd need something else, something other than rel=license if we are to address this issue for Microformats. Perhaps As Dr Ernie suggested in 2006[1] Now that RFC 4946 [2] specifies rel-license for Atom, should we adopt that as a normative reference? Its a Good thought it would almost eliminate the rel=licence issue for good. [...] 2. The license Link Relation [2] The license link relation can be used to associate licenses with a feed or entry. Feed and entry elements MAY contain any number of license link relations but MUST NOT contain more than one with the same combination of href and type attribute values. The IRI specified by the link's href attribute SHOULD be dereferenceable to return a representation of the license. The license representation MAY be machine readable. [] Just a thought :-) [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-license-issues+ACM-Issues [2] http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc4946.html Thanks Martin McEvoy ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] rel=license scoping and hAudio
Manu Sporny wrote: Martin McEvoy wrote: Is it safe to say that I can re-close issue D6: 2008-01-10 hAudio notes inconsistency [1] ? (if thats ok with everyone else that is?) Yes, please do close Issue D6 - I think we're all in agreement and there's no way that we're going to add anything like rel=license in this version of hAudio due to a lack of examples. Done see: http://microformats.org/wiki?title=haudio-issuesdiff=0oldid=28319#D6:_2008-01-10_hAudio_notes_inconsistency Thanks -- manu ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
