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
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
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,
: 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
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
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
-
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
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
