[cc-metadata] a rel=meta for license embedding ?

Sylvain Zimmer sylvain at sylvainzimmer.com
Fri Dec 23 06:57:31 EST 2005


Mike Linksvayer wrote:

>On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 23:59 +0100, Sylvain Zimmer wrote:
>  
>
>>The problem is that I'm telling users that they have to put CC metadata 
>>on their website. We want to keep it simple so this solution would be 
>>ideal, but it's not in 
>>http://creativecommons.org/technology/metadata/extend ...
>>
>>LINKing to a .rdf is not supported by all readers but what about this ? 
>>if valid, is it supported at all ? ;-)
>>    
>>
>
>As far as I know there is zero support in programs for the scheme
>described.  Even <link> is ignored (afaik) by Yahoo! and Google's CC
>searches.
>
>Is there some reason you can't use RDF embedded in HTML comments, apart
>from ugliness?
>  
>
We use this for music albums, so there's one <Work> for each track, that 
usually means a lot of RDF...

Moreover, I've got some problems with utf8/iso8859. Currently, we give 
our artists the utf8-encoded rdf and tell them to put it in their 
websites. But as most of their pages are in iso8859, there are some 
validation issues.

Example : 
http://validator.creativecommons.org/validate.py?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpcmontigny.free.fr%2Fliens%2Fliens.html&submit=Parse+URI

We can't ask them whether their pages are in utf8 or iso or whatever, 
it's too complicated. So it would be ideal to host the rdf ourselves and 
just give them a simple HTML bit linking to it. We can't really use the 
a rel=license I think, because it's not the page that's CC-licensed, 
it's the album... right ?

I don't really mind yahoo/google not supporting a rel=meta currently, as 
long as it's an official way to do it (so they should add support for it 
in the future.).

So what are your thoughts on this ? Is a rel=meta okay ? Can you think 
of a better way to solve our problem ?

Thanks in advance !

Sylvain


More information about the cc-metadata mailing list