Developer discussion for Creative Commons technology and tools

[NuriyyaFirst Name Khalilova <khalilovak74 AT yahoo.com>]

Contents of cc-devel digest

• How to protect the harm from the computer- long work.
• How to make a computer healthy. 
• How  make it in turn.

---

From: "cc-devel-request AT lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-devel-request AT lists.ibiblio.org>
To: cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Wednesday, 16 January 2013, 3:04
Subject: cc-devel Digest, Vol 80, Issue 5

Send cc-devel mailing list submissions to
    cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    cc-devel-request AT lists.ibiblio.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
    cc-devel-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cc-devel digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: CCRel in microdata (Jonas ?berg)
  2. Re: CCRel in microdata (Greg Grossmeier)
  3. Re: CCRel in microdata (Maarten Zeinstra)
  4. Re: CCRel in microdata (Maarten Zeinstra)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 19:35:59 +0100
From: Jonas ?berg <jonas AT coyote.org>
Subject: Re: [cc-devel] CCRel in microdata
To: Greg Grossmeier <greg AT grossmeier.net>
Cc: "cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID:
    <CAECQ_doBo5Z=8baFjRnQ_BAMi6jL3u3qdEsR09HG-41AZ2T6iQ AT mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi Greg, and everyone else, and thanks to Maarten for bring this issue to
the table!

I echo Maartens sentiment that there is a lack of structured information
about CC's technology -- including information about which tools are
retired and which are not. To give another example; the lib license wiki
page doesn't say anything about lib license being retired, but in practice,
the last work on this was in early 2009. Clearly, we have work to do on
updating our resources!

As some of you know, I have a great deal of interest in metadata for
licensing, attribution and provenance, and I'd be happy to put some work
into this to help move things forward.

I'd say we're about three years behind on a Creative Commons Technology
Summit! :-)

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/TechSummit

All the best,
Jonas



On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Greg Grossmeier <greg AT grossmeier.net>wrote:

> Hi Maarten,
>
> I agree.
>
> Others might disagree with me (if you do, let me know): but I think it
> is too early to say which syntax has won the semweb war. Some may have
> opinions on which one(s) lost, but I don't know if we can say any one
> won.
>
> I see this in the same way I see us "supporting" license metadata in
> files (eg pdfs). We don't say LibreOffice won and thus don't give
> examples of how to do it in MS Office (if there are such examples at
> all).
>
> So, yes, we (I/someone in CC Tech) should rework much of
> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Metadata (and related pages).
>
> On a basic level, we should at least have 3 examples on some page
> marking up the same content with 3 different syntaxes.
>
> Timeframe, not really.
>
> I can put it on my short term list to create
> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_REL/Examples and outline the basic
> examples.
>
> On the long term, updating
> http://labs.creativecommons.org/2011/ccrel-guide/ is probably wise.
>
> I'll get back to you/the list with progress/more information.
>
> Greg
>
> <quote name="Maarten Zeinstra" date="2013-01-14" time="09:21:00 +0100">
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > Sure that gives me some more information about RDF and schema.org.
> >
> > However most institutions that deal with large metadata formats don't
> care much about presenting rights information easily to third parties. So
> it is usually already a lot of work to convince them to put proper rights
> information online.Rights information is usually the last requirement for
> web development. When such a party already adopted microdata or
> microformats than I cannot argue that they should refactor their metadata
> presentation layer because of something they regard as a small detail.
> Remember they are usually more than happy to puts rights information in
> DC:rights as a piece of text (in their own language).
> >
> > That's why I think that we should start reworking/updating our examples
> of the implementation of CCRel to properly reflect its possibilities. We
> should build examples for microdata, microformats and XML (like I suggested
> almost 2 years ago) implementations of CCRel to properly use that standard.
> >
> > I am more than happy to assist in this, but I look toward you to manage
> that process. So do you have a time framei for us/me?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Maarten
> >
> > On Jan 11, 2013, at 18:38 , Greg Grossmeier <greg AT grossmeier.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Maarten!
> > >
> > > <quote name="mz AT kl.nl" date="2013-01-11" time="13:08:33 +0100">
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> I always promote CCRel when an organisation asks me for advice when
> > >> switching to a CC based publishing model (mostly NGO, Non-profits and
> > >> governments).
> > >
> > > Thanks for your hard work on this.
> > >
> > >> But lately I have the feeling that our direction with
> > >> CCRel is getting outdated/outpaced by microdata initiatives like
> > >> schema.org. There is no version or implementation guide available for
> > >> CCRel available for microdata and microformats.
> > >
> > > Two things:
> > >
> > > 1) Yes, CCRel hasn't been updated in a long time.
> > >
> > > 2) Correction: Schema.org isn't *only* microdata. That ontology is also
> > > perfectly usable (and officially supported) in RDFa 1.1 lite:
> > > http://blog.schema.org/2011/11/using-rdfa-11-lite-with-schemaorg.html
> > >
> > > Also see:
> > > http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html
> > > "Our use of Microdata maps easily into RDFa Lite. In fact, all of
> > > Schema.org can be used with the RDFa Lite syntax as is. The RDFa Lite
> > > version of the markup looks almost isomorphic to the Microdata
> version."
> > >
> > >> Also I see advices
> > >> from google that microdata, microformats and RDFa should not be mixed
> > >> in one webpage.
> > >
> > > Correct. Which is why I am recommending to people to use RDFa when
> > > implementing Schema.org unless otherwise needed.
> > >
> > >> If we do bring about new implementation guides for
> > >> other version than our rights description language will be bypassed in
> > >> favour for DC:rights. Something that is not desirable.
> > >>
> > >> I believe we should start working on better descriptions of CCRel that
> > >> fits these other use cases.
> > >>
> > >> What are your thoughts about these?
> > >
> > > Agree and agree. We should make sure we update our documentation to be
> > > more explicit about how to handle this situation.
> > >
> > >
> > > Did my clarification above help you in your current work?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Greg
> > >
> > > --
> > > | Greg Grossmeier            GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
> > > | http://grossmeier.net          A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |
> >
>
> --
> | Greg Grossmeier            GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
> | http://grossmeier.net          A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |
> _______________________________________________
> cc-devel mailing list
> cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
>
> --  <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/cc-devel/attachments/20130115/5acd00b9/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:20:16 -0800
From: Greg Grossmeier <greg AT grossmeier.net>
Subject: Re: [cc-devel] CCRel in microdata
To: cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20130115192016.GE4315@x220>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Maarten,

I didn't want to let this linger without a response while I work on the
details in the background...

<quote name="Maarten Zeinstra" date="2013-01-15" time="00:54:28 +0100">
> The semweb war is not our war. Good rights labelling is our war. ( I
> challenge anyone who thinks otherwise :) )

Agree :)

> Although any winner of the semwar will influence the way we need to
> communicate rights information. It is best for CC to be neutral and
> provide help to all parties. Porting CCRel to microdata or
> mircoformats should not be too difficult. Making a xsd for ccrel is
> peanuts. I even worked on it with Nathan Yergler but our mails
> conversation about that suddenly seemed to stop in september 2010.
>
> I've included my draft that I communicated to Ben Adida, Mike
> Linksvayer and Nathan Yergler in 2010, although I haven't read it
> since.

Thanks for that. For some reason LibreOffice couldn't open that
correctly, but Google Docs could. It is here (and publicly commentable,
I can add you as an author if you like and send me your preferred email
for that):
http://goo.gl/w6MFk

> I can work on these issues, write and review drafts if only there is
> someone at CC-HQ that is able to actually publish/change/coordinate
> something.

I will take up the lead on that from CC HQ for now. I don't want good
work to be lost.

> You state that you want to add a page to the wiki with examples, but I
> think CC-HQ has tried and tested the Wiki solution for quite some time
> now and has to determine that hat way simply does not work. Those
> pages are a big unsupervised mess. Simply adding more information to
> those pages shows only that there is no determination of getting
> CC-technology structured and useful. To give an example, I don't think
> I ever found the link http://labs.creativecommons.org/2011/ccrel-guide
> before you said in your mail below.

Right, more info isn't good (and I agree with Jonas' later email)
without a concerted effort to streamline. I do think the wiki is a fine
place for some documentation, but the current state of things, well,
isn't good, and doesn't lead to a sane situation.

> Sorry for the rant, but this has been frustrating me for a while now.

No worries, Maarten, I understand completely.

> Now let's be pro active and practical: Greg if you can put that page
> http://labs.creativecommons.org/2011/ccrel-guide on a google doc, open
> it for all to comment and place that link on this mailing list.i

I just noticed that the guide has its own git repository on
code.creativecommons.org:
http://code.creativecommons.org/viewgit/ccrel-guide.git/

But, I've also put up a commentable version on Google Docs here:
http://goo.gl/v7GAT  -- It isn't the prettiest of displays, but it works
for now.


Thanks for the prodding, Maarten.

Greg

--
| Greg Grossmeier            GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
| http://grossmeier.net          A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |


------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 23:52:50 +0100
From: Maarten Zeinstra <mz AT kl.nl>
Subject: Re: [cc-devel] CCRel in microdata
To: Greg Grossmeier <greg AT grossmeier.net>
Cc: cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <B200F09A-6C81-42C4-B4D2-2FD996FCF238 AT kl.nl" style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;" href="">B200F09A-6C81-42C4-B4D2-2FD996FCF238 AT kl.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi Greg,

Thanks for the response.

comments inline.

Cheers,

Maarten

On Jan 15, 2013, at 20:20 , Greg Grossmeier <greg AT grossmeier.net> wrote:

> Maarten,
>
> I didn't want to let this linger without a response while I work on the
> details in the background...
>
> <quote name="Maarten Zeinstra" date="2013-01-15" time="00:54:28 +0100">
>> The semweb war is not our war. Good rights labelling is our war. ( I
>> challenge anyone who thinks otherwise :) )
>
> Agree :)
>
>> Although any winner of the semwar will influence the way we need to
>> communicate rights information. It is best for CC to be neutral and
>> provide help to all parties. Porting CCRel to microdata or
>> mircoformats should not be too difficult. Making a xsd for ccrel is
>> peanuts. I even worked on it with Nathan Yergler but our mails
>> conversation about that suddenly seemed to stop in september 2010.
>>
>> I've included my draft that I communicated to Ben Adida, Mike
>> Linksvayer and Nathan Yergler in 2010, although I haven't read it
>> since.
>
> Thanks for that. For some reason LibreOffice couldn't open that
> correctly, but Google Docs could. It is here (and publicly commentable,
> I can add you as an author if you like and send me your preferred email
> for that):
> http://goo.gl/w6MFk

This address will do just fine.
>
>> I can work on these issues, write and review drafts if only there is
>> someone at CC-HQ that is able to actually publish/change/coordinate
>> something.
>
> I will take up the lead on that from CC HQ for now. I don't want good
> work to be lost.

Good
>
>> You state that you want to add a page to the wiki with examples, but I
>> think CC-HQ has tried and tested the Wiki solution for quite some time
>> now and has to determine that hat way simply does not work. Those
>> pages are a big unsupervised mess. Simply adding more information to
>> those pages shows only that there is no determination of getting
>> CC-technology structured and useful. To give an example, I don't think
>> I ever found the link http://labs.creativecommons.org/2011/ccrel-guide
>> before you said in your mail below.
>
> Right, more info isn't good (and I agree with Jonas' later email)
> without a concerted effort to streamline. I do think the wiki is a fine
> place for some documentation, but the current state of things, well,
> isn't good, and doesn't lead to a sane situation.

Maybe we should create or find a page that lists all products/ ways that CC tries to communicates technology and see if there are affiliates or volunteers that like to rank them on their importance, then build a better tech outreach plan based on that.
>
>> Sorry for the rant, but this has been frustrating me for a while now.
>
> No worries, Maarten, I understand completely.
>
>> Now let's be pro active and practical: Greg if you can put that page
>> http://labs.creativecommons.org/2011/ccrel-guide on a google doc, open
>> it for all to comment and place that link on this mailing list.i
>
> I just noticed that the guide has its own git repository on
> code.creativecommons.org:
> http://code.creativecommons.org/viewgit/ccrel-guide.git/
>
> But, I've also put up a commentable version on Google Docs here:
> http://goo.gl/v7GAT  -- It isn't the prettiest of displays, but it works
> for now.

Google docs works fine for me. I lowers the threshold for anyone to comment on the doc.
>
>
> Thanks for the prodding, Maarten.
>
> Greg
>
> --
> | Greg Grossmeier            GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
> | http://grossmeier.net          A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |
> _______________________________________________
> cc-devel mailing list
> cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 00:04:41 +0100
From: Maarten Zeinstra <mz AT kl.nl>
Subject: Re: [cc-devel] CCRel in microdata
To: Jonas ?berg <jonas AT coyote.org>
Cc: "cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <BB2DC120-330C-4662-8E8B-F82289ECD497 AT kl.nl" style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: 12pt;" href="">BB2DC120-330C-4662-8E8B-F82289ECD497 AT kl.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi Jonas,

Could you also look at the xsd proposal that Greg put up in a Google Doc? I would consider that low hanging fruit.

Maybe we should create a large group/committee/task force of tech CC'ers that goes through the process of evaluating all CC tech documents and pages. Adopting an agile method with sprints of two weeks where we polish one part of CC-tech at each sprint. That way we could be able to refactor some of the parts of CC's infrastructure, re-familarize ourselves with some of these pages and create a structure as to not lose focus or get lost in the forest of projects and pages.

Cheers,

Maarten

On Jan 15, 2013, at 19:35 , Jonas ?berg <jonas AT coyote.org> wrote:

> Hi Greg, and everyone else, and thanks to Maarten for bring this issue to the table!
>
> I echo Maartens sentiment that there is a lack of structured information about CC's technology -- including information about which tools are retired and which are not. To give another example; the liblicense wiki page doesn't say anything about liblicense being retired, but in practice, the last work on this was in early 2009. Clearly, we have work to do on updating our resources!
>
> As some of you know, I have a great deal of interest in metadata for licensing, attribution and provenance, and I'd be happy to put some work into this to help move things forward.
>
> I'd say we're about three years behind on a Creative Commons Technology Summit! :-)
>
> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/TechSummit
>
> All the best,
> Jonas
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Greg Grossmeier <greg AT grossmeier.net> wrote:
> Hi Maarten,
>
> I agree.
>
> Others might disagree with me (if you do, let me know): but I think it
> is too early to say which syntax has won the semweb war. Some may have
> opinions on which one(s) lost, but I don't know if we can say any one
> won.
>
> I see this in the same way I see us "supporting" license metadata in
> files (eg pdfs). We don't say LibreOffice won and thus don't give
> examples of how to do it in MS Office (if there are such examples at
> all).
>
> So, yes, we (I/someone in CC Tech) should rework much of
> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Metadata (and related pages).
>
> On a basic level, we should at least have 3 examples on some page
> marking up the same content with 3 different syntaxes.
>
> Timeframe, not really.
>
> I can put it on my short term list to create
> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC_REL/Examples and outline the basic
> examples.
>
> On the long term, updating
> http://labs.creativecommons.org/2011/ccrel-guide/ is probably wise.
>
> I'll get back to you/the list with progress/more information.
>
> Greg
>
> <quote name="Maarten Zeinstra" date="2013-01-14" time="09:21:00 +0100">
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > Sure that gives me some more information about RDF and schema.org.
> >
> > However most institutions that deal with large metadata formats don't care much about presenting rights information easily to third parties. So it is usually already a lot of work to convince them to put proper rights information online.Rights information is usually the last requirement for web development. When such a party already adopted microdata or microformats than I cannot argue that they should refactor their metadata presentation layer because of something they regard as a small detail. Remember they are usually more than happy to puts rights information in DC:rights as a piece of text (in their own language).
> >
> > That's why I think that we should start reworking/updating our examples of the implementation of CCRel to properly reflect its possibilities. We should build examples for microdata, microformats and XML (like I suggested almost 2 years ago) implementations of CCRel to properly use that standard.
> >
> > I am more than happy to assist in this, but I look toward you to manage that process. So do you have a timeframe for us/me?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Maarten
> >
> > On Jan 11, 2013, at 18:38 , Greg Grossmeier <greg AT grossmeier.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Maarten!
> > >
> > > <quote name="mz AT kl.nl" date="2013-01-11" time="13:08:33 +0100">
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> I always promote CCRel when an organisation asks me for advice when
> > >> switching to a CC based publishing model (mostly NGO, Non-profits and
> > >> governments).
> > >
> > > Thanks for your hard work on this.
> > >
> > >> But lately I have the feeling that our direction with
> > >> CCRel is getting outdated/outpaced by microdata initiatives like
> > >> schema.org. There is no version or implementation guide available for
> > >> CCRel available for microdata and microformats.
> > >
> > > Two things:
> > >
> > > 1) Yes, CCRel hasn't been updated in a long time.
> > >
> > > 2) Correction: Schema.org isn't *only* microdata. That ontology is also
> > > perfectly usable (and officially supported) in RDFa 1.1 lite:
> > > http://blog.schema.org/2011/11/using-rdfa-11-lite-with-schemaorg.html
> > >
> > > Also see:
> > > http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html
> > > "Our use of Microdata maps easily into RDFa Lite. In fact, all of
> > > Schema.org can be used with the RDFa Lite syntax as is. The RDFa Lite
> > > version of the markup looks almost isomorphic to the Microdata version."
> > >
> > >> Also I see advices
> > >> from google that microdata, microformats and RDFa should not be mixed
> > >> in one webpage.
> > >
> > > Correct. Which is why I am recommending to people to use RDFa when
> > > implementing Schema.org unless otherwise needed.
> > >
> > >> If we do bring about new implementation guides for
> > >> other version than our rights description language will be bypassed in
> > >> favour for DC:rights. Something that is not desirable.
> > >>
> > >> I believe we should start working on better descriptions of CCRel that
> > >> fits these other use cases.
> > >>
> > >> What are your thoughts about these?
> > >
> > > Agree and agree. We should make sure we update our documentation to be
> > > more explicit about how to handle this situation.
> > >
> > >
> > > Did my clarification above help you in your current work?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Greg
> > >
> > > --
> > > | Greg Grossmeier            GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
> > > | http://grossmeier.net          A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |
> >
>
> --
> | Greg Grossmeier            GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
> | http://grossmeier.net          A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |
> _______________________________________________
> cc-devel mailing list
> cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
>
> --

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/cc-devel/attachments/20130116/2d9e3ea2/attachment.html

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
cc-devel mailing list
cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel


End of cc-devel Digest, Vol 80, Issue 5
***************************************