ml at creativecommons.org
Fri Jul 30 18:51:56 EDT 2004
questions.xml should be a schema for answers.xml with user-visible
labels, descriptions, and help text as annotations.
I wonder whether going this route would make things easier or more
confusing for implementors?
Mike Linksvayer wrote:
> General and specific feedback wanted. Patches welcome.
> The idea is to encapsulate the "choose license" process (see
> <http://creativecommons.org/license/> in a file or a few files that
> can be reused in different environments (e.g., standalone apps) without
> having those apps reproduce the core language surrounding the process
> or the rules for translating user answers into a license choice and
> associated metadata.
> Making the "questions" available as XML (questions.xml) and "rules" as
> XSL (chooselicense.xsl) attempts to maximize accessibility and minimize
> reimplementation of logic across multiple implementations.
> An implementation will render questions.xml in some UI and produce
> an XML document with the user's "answers" see (the ./test directory
> for examples). This document is then fed through chooselicense.xsl,
> which produces another XML document with the chosen license's URL and
> associated metadata (including complete RDF and HTML with embedded RDF).
> CVS: http://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=80503 (module chooselicense-xml)
> ViewCVS: http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/cctools/chooselicense-xml
> * questions.xml needs more license groups.
> * questions.xml probably needs to take a hints from
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/ (datatypes) and the rest of XML
> Schema, Relax NG, and the like.
> * questions.xml needs to be generated from a template + gettext files
> * chooselicense.xsl needs to be generated from a template + gettext files
> * answers.xml (generated by implementor) needs a DTD
> * tests need to actually test
> * sample implementation(s)
More information about the cc-metadata