[cc-community] Is there a validator for CC tagging?

Paul Houle paul at ontology2.com
Tue Mar 9 12:10:15 EST 2010


Nathan Yergler wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> We've had a validator/extractor in the past; the current version,
> developed for Google Summer of Code a couple years ago, is up at
> http://validator.creativecommons.org/.  It has some issues (and
> incomplete areas) right now, but I think it's functional.  We're
> planning some improvements to it later this year (probably over the
> summer).
>   

    I found that my code doesn't validate.  Unfortunately the validator 
doesn't give me any insight as to why.
> We recommend using [X]HTML+RDFa for marking works as licensed.  You
> can obtain the correct markup by going to
> http://creativecommons.org/choose/.
>
> Regards,
>   
    Well,  I find that a deeply unsatisfactory answer.

    Now,  there might be a day when there is an HTML+RDFa standard,  but 
it doesn't really exist.  At the moment,  it is tied to XHTML,  which 
is,  practically,  about as successful as Netscape Netcaster.  Yes,  
you'll find pages that have XHTML documents,  and some of them are even 
valid and well-formed,  however,  it's pretty difficult to create 
dynamic sites that reliably produce good XHTML with mainstream 
toolsets.  (I remember a blog article that advocated that web browsers 
should reject ill-formed XHTML documents,  that,  inevitably,  served an 
XHTML doctype with an ill-formed XHTML document.)  Even if you manage to 
solve that problem (ASP.NET can make good XHTML,  but it's challenge to 
get anything else to work right) or sweep it under the rug,  using the 
XHTML doctype appears to increase cross-browser rendering problems 
rather than diminish them.

    I'm also concerned about the interoperability of RDFa.  Looking 
back,  some people see RDF/XML as a mistake that retarded the growth of 
the semantic web for much of a decade.  RDFa repeats the same mistakes:  
by offering people ten thousand different ways that could attach 
metadata to their documents,  I think people are going to be confused,  
intimidated,  mostly decide not to do it,  and the 5% that do try to do 
it are going to do it wrong.  I've got a lot of skepticism that any kind 
of interoperable ecosystem will emerge here.

    On the other hand,  if it can really be made as simple as dropping 
in a <meta> element,  and if you can give people unambiguous 
instructions that give them exactly one choice as to how to do it,  I 
think you'd get a high take-up rate.




More information about the cc-community mailing list