[cc-devel] GSoC proposal suggestion

Nathan R. Yergler nathan at creativecommons.org
Fri Apr 9 09:06:02 EDT 2010


Sorry for the confusion, I actually think combining those two is fine --
as you accurately point out, they share certain elements, and their
maintenance may benefit from a shared tree.

Thanks for your proposal/application, and to everyone who's expressed
interest in CC's GSoC to date.  It looks like it's going to be a great
year for SoC.

Regards,

Nathan


On 04/08/2010 10:14 PM, Dean Olson wrote:
> Well, I submitted a proposal to work on Chrome and Firefox extensions
> collectively rather than separately. The reason I did not want to
> separate them is because I believe it can be of great benefit to build
> them together and to share as much code between them as possible. The
> extension frameworks for both browsers use JavaScript, CSS, and XML to
> construct their extensions. If we can create a common code base between
> the two extensions, I believe that they can be maintained together
> rather than duplicating effort down the road. 
> 
> If it is decided that the extensions would be better off developed
> independently of one another, then I would be happy to work on the
> Chrome extension since there seems to be less interest expressed in
> developing for that browser. I've looked over the documentation for
> building extensions for both browsers and I see many conceptual
> similarities between them. And the common language of JavaScript
> combined with XML makes it so much easier to design for them both.
> 
> 
> Dean Olson
> 
> 
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Nathan R. Yergler
> <nathan at creativecommons.org <mailto:nathan at creativecommons.org>> wrote:
> 
>     I concur with nearly everything Nathan Kinkade said.
> 
>     With respect to the adding from URL, the interesting thing is not adding
>     the URL of the image/video/etc (as currently supported) but from a page
>     that contains the resource + metadata.
> 
>     With respect to your proposal, I'd rather see proposals that focus on
>     doing one thing really, really well and completely than on a couple of
>     different projects.
> 
>     Regards,
> 
>     Nathan
> 
> 
>     On 04/08/2010 12:56 PM, Nathan Kinkade wrote:
>     > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Cassio Melo
>     <cassio.ufpe at gmail.com <mailto:cassio.ufpe at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     >> I think I will apply for other project, to not be unfair with
>     other students
>     >> that are already engaged in this project longer than me :)
>     >>
>     >> As for the FF and Chrome extensions... I think adding support to the
>     >> Wordpress Media Manager is more important to CC, isn't it? Or
>     maybe both
>     >> projects in the same application (I think it's viable and it may
>     increase my
>     >> points)?
>     >>
>     >> I would like to know your opinion about the following part of my
>     >> application:
>     >>
>     >> Wordpress Media Manager Extension
>     >> ===========================
>     >>
>     >> 1. Project planning
>     >>
>     >> Delivering it as a plugin is the preferred option. However some
>     issues have
>     >> to be considered like for example, how to deal with metadata
>     imported from
>     >> an URL or in case of inserting the license code along with the
>     media in the
>     >> page. A patch might be needed along with the plugin.
>     >>
>     >> 2. Extending Media Manager interface to support CC licensing process
>     >>
>     >> This is relatively easy to accomplish using the LicenseChooser.js for
>     >> integrating license selection into the application.
>     >>
>     >> 3. Store license and attribution information in the WordPress
>     database
>     >>
>     >> I will investigate the appropriate handling of licensing
>     information in the
>     >> Wordpress database and to insert the license metadata in the
>     media (it might
>     >> require a patch for that).
>     >>
>     >> Possible additional contributions (time permitting):
>     >>
>     >>    - Include support for adding media from URL (fetching the license
>     >> metadata as well);
>     >>    - Create an extension for Joomla as well;
>     >>
>     >>     Once installed, the license-selection extension will appear as a
>     >> fieldset right below the file information (title, caption, etc).
>     It will
>     >> generate a the license logo and a short summary of the license
>     chosen right
>     >> after the selection (using AJAX).
>     >>
>     >> ====
>     >>
>     >> Too confusing? I appreciate any feedback!
>     >>
>     >> Best regards,
>     >> Cassio
>     >
>     > Cassio,
>     >
>     > I'm personally more interested in WordPress integration, but others
>     > may disagree or have interests elsewhere.
>     >
>     > 1) Yes, a plugin is ideal.  I can't speak for other people at CC, but
>     > for me any integration that requires changes to the core WordPress
>     > code is not particularly interesting.  It would hamper and complicate
>     > uptake by people.   Ideally, the plugin would be simple and elegant,
>     > to such a degree that WordPress devs may even at some point consider
>     > integrating the functionality into the core code, obsoleting the
>     > plugin.
>     >
>     > 2) I personally would rather a plugin not leverage LicenseChooser.js,
>     > but support only the "Unported" licenses.  This should greatly
>     > simplify the plugin, making necessary only a single call the CC API to
>     > find what the latest version of the Unported licenses are.  Other
>     > will/may disagree with me on this, and it is just my personal view on
>     > it so it shouldn't be taken as me setting any guidelines on the
>     > project.
>     >
>     > I'm not sure how you would implement grabbing metadata while fetching
>     > an image from a URL.  The URL for the image may not be at all related
>     > to the actual page where the image is displayed, and that page is
>     > where any metadata would likely be ... unless I'm confusing something.
>     >
>     > Again, this is just my personal feedback.  I'm not defining the
>     > project and others, principally Nathan Yergler, may differ from me and
>     > basically he'll be the one likely setting the project bounds and
>     > scope.
>     >
>     > Best
>     >
>     > Nathan
> 
>     --
>     Nathan R. Yergler
>     Chief Technology Officer
>     Creative Commons
> 
>     http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Nathan_Yergler
>     _______________________________________________
>     cc-devel mailing list
>     cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org <mailto:cc-devel at lists.ibiblio.org>
>     http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
> 
> 

-- 
Nathan R. Yergler
Chief Technology Officer
Creative Commons

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Nathan_Yergler



More information about the cc-devel mailing list