Developer discussion for Creative Commons technology and tools

[Jon Phillips <jon AT rejon.org>]

On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 15:22 -0700, Jason Kivlighn wrote:
> > Aha, more details wrt to the Journal in OLPC, where cc licensing
> > happens...openoffice.org opendocument format is what OLPC will use as
> > default. How's our liblicense support for that format?
> >   
> Support for writing licenses into opendocument files involves extending
> the format's metadata description itself to include licenses. 
> Opendocument's metadata description doesn't natively include a field for
> licenses.
> 
> Opendocument does support four user-defined fields, but I don't think
> it's a good idea to encourage using that to store licenses.  It makes
> migration to the long-term solution of using an extended odt metadata
> descritpion all the more difficult.
> 
> Basically, before liblicense can support opendocument, we need a
> specification.  I've seen some news on a specification, but I don't know
> what the progress or timeline is.
> 
> Cheers,
> Jason

This is super high priority. We need to figure out the spec for this
that works with the OO.o folks. I'm cc'ing Hubert, who is working on
OO.o for Novell.

Hub, what do you think? What would be really great is to get xmp working
as the standard. In fact, I would advocate for this if possible, esp. if
there isn't a clear way forward.

So, would be great to pick a good step forward on this, here from Cassio
as well, and then bring up the best way forward on the olpc list. 

Since OpenDocFormat is going to be the default format on OLPC, metadata
is critical to pick and move forward on. XMP on OpenDoc is what I would
like to see...then we can add to eXMPi...

Jon

> > Jon
> >
> > -------- Forwarded Message --------
> >   
> >> From: Martin Sevior <msevior AT physics.unimelb.edu.au>
> >> Reply-To: msevior AT physics.unimelb.edu.au
> >> To: Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves <justivo AT gmail.com>
> >> Cc: sugar AT lists.laptop.org
> >> Subject: Re: [sugar] First impressions of a B4 machine
> >> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:31:03 +1000
> >>
> >> On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 06:29 +0100, Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves wrote:
> >>     
> >>> Hello Sugar and Devel lists,
> >>>       
> >>> Next is AbiWord.  Why was it not stripped of support for most file
> >>> formats? 
> >>>       
> >> Once the integration with the journal is complete, the users will be not
> >> normally be asked anything about filename or fileformat. The default
> >> format written to the journal is currently *.odt
> >>
> >> Nevertheless Write will continue to be able to read *.doc,*rtf and *.abw
> >> files, since the former are extremely common about the internet and the
> >> latter is built into the program, is a trivial amount of code , is
> >> required for the AbiCollab document collaboration and guarantees loss
> >> less saving/loading for non-typical use cases.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Martin
> >>
> >>  
> >>     
> >>> Thank you for your attention,
> >>> Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves,
> >>> Xiph.Org Foundation
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Sugar mailing list
> >>> Sugar AT lists.laptop.org
> >>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
> >>>       
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sugar mailing list
> >> Sugar AT lists.laptop.org
> >> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
> >>     
> 
-- 
Jon Phillips

San Francisco, CA
USA PH 510.499.0894
jon AT rejon.org
http://www.rejon.org

MSN, AIM, Yahoo Chat: kidproto
Jabber Chat: rejon AT gristle.org
IRC: rejon AT irc.freenode.net