cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Developer discussion for Creative Commons technology and tools
List archive
- From: Jon Phillips <jon AT rejon.org>
- To: Jason Kivlighn <jkivlighn AT gmail.com>
- Cc: cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org, asheesh AT creativecommons.org
- Subject: Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work]
- Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:20:07 -0700
All sounds good, but I think best to channel these ideas onto the wiki
and roadmap. Rafael, can your team help with some of these todos and
give good feedback.
Cheers!
Jon
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 22:46 -0700, Jason Kivlighn wrote:
> We're looking at various different use-cases, all of which should be
> handled separately. I want to be sure we're clear on which use-cases
> we're dealing with and discussing here. All cases should be handled,
> and handling one case shouldn't interfere with another.
>
> 1) Selecting a license for a file from within a file manager (i.e.
> Dolphin or Nautilus). We could be dealing with any type of content --
> source code, content/media, etc -- so being able to select the right
> class of license based on the file type makes sense.
>
> 2) Selecting a license from within a specific application, i.e.
> KOffice. When KOffice offers the user a choice of licenses, we can
> safely assume that we want to offer content licenses (like CC). We
> don't need to offer the GPL or other source code license as a choice.
> No automation based on file type is required.
>
> 3) In the case of using liblicense with KNewStuff, a license is
> potentially selected for a collection of files. This is the case where
> what is being fetched is a tarball or zip. We can't go by the file
> type, since the tarball may be a collection of CC-licensed photos, or an
> application licensed under the Artistic License. The user should
> explicitly specify whether it's content, source code, or something else.
>
> I like the idea of extending the license metadata (the RDF) to include a
> "class" element which specifies whether it's a license recommended for
> source code, content, or some other class. This is the most generic
> solution. An application could ask for licenses from a particular
> class. Or if appropriate, it could determine for itself which license
> class to choose from based on a mime-type. Liblicense could even
> include a set of known file type to license class mappings to ease in
> the frontend implementation.
>
> Given all of the above, I think liblicense should make it easy to create
> two types of license choosers: 1) a frontend license chooser that is
> content-based, like we currently ship. And 2) It should also make it
> easy to create a general license chooser that covers source code
> licensing and everything else. This could simply present a list of
> licenses to choose from, while providing additional info describing each
> license. One might consider an attribute-based license chooser, like
> the current one for content, that would be used to license source code
> -- but given the intricacies among source code licenses, it just doesn't
> make sense and couldn't possibly be accurate. Choosing between the two
> types would be up to the application to decide -- an application can do
> what makes sense for the current context (i.e. the 3 contexts above).
>
> Okay, enough rambling. I'm just throwing out bottled-up, random,
> thoughts. Maybe I'm over-complicating things.
>
> Cheers,
> Jason
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> >> Possible, yes... I just want to point out that we'd first have to extend
> >> the API and license RDF to specify "classes" of licenses. That way
> >> liblicense knows which license is which class (content, source code,
> >> documentation, etc.).
> >>
> >
> > I suggest somehow that the allowed licenses are determined
> > automatically by the system. Well, KDE knows what kind of file it is.
> > Why put a radio button or a combo if it can be done automatically ?
> >
> > There should be a "database" that says for each filetype what licenses
> > are supported.
> >
> >
> > Bye,
> > Rafael Fernández López.
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> cc-devel mailing list
> cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
--
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
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Jason K, 08/29/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Asheesh Laroia, 08/29/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Jason Kivlighn, 08/29/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Rafael Fernández López, 08/29/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Jason Kivlighn, 08/30/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Jon Phillips, 08/30/2007
- Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work], Rafael Fernández López, 08/31/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Jon Phillips, 08/30/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Jason Kivlighn, 08/30/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Rafael Fernández López, 08/29/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Jason Kivlighn, 08/29/2007
-
Re: [cc-devel] liblicense [creative commons work],
Asheesh Laroia, 08/29/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.