Developer discussion for Creative Commons technology and tools

[Maarten Zeinstra <mz AT kl.nl>]

So Jonas what do you propose.

Would it be better to adjust XMP output of the chooser?

Cheers,

Maarten
-- 
Kennisland | www.kennisland.nl | t +31205756720 | m +31643053919 | @mzeinstra




On Jun 11, 2013, at 18:36 , Nathan Yergler <nathan AT yergler.net> wrote:

> That's a great point, the formatting does conflate the creator and the
> work a bit.
> 
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Jonas Öberg <jonas AT coyote.org> wrote:
>> Hi Nathan!
>> 
>> I'd be hard pressed to argue semantics with one of the ccREL authors :-)
>> 
>> The specification is clear that attributionURL is "the URL to link to
>> when providing attribution", which is a reference to the license
>> requirement. I think what confuses it is that this is most often used,
>> even in the ccREL examples, to refer to what can be interpreted as the
>> URL of the attributionName. For example in the RDFa:
>> 
>> This work by <a xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#";
>> href="http://jonasoberg.net/"; property="cc:attributionName"
>> rel="cc:attributionURL">Jonas Öberg</a> is licensed under a <a
>> rel="license" 
>> href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en_US";>Creative
>> Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License</a>.
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Jonas
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Nathan Yergler <nathan AT yergler.net> wrote:
>>> How do you believe a web statement differs from the attribution URL,
>>> functionally?
>>> 
>>> IIRC a "web statement" is supposed to be a web accessible resource
>>> that contains information about the rights, permissions, etc related
>>> to the work. CC licenses state that the attribution URL only needs to
>>> be cited with the work when it includes copyright information or
>>> license notice (4(b)(iii) in
>>> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode). So both need to
>>> be web-accessible resources that contain license, copyright, or rights
>>> information. I believe that was the basis for treating them as
>>> synonyms.
>>> 
>>> NRY
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Jonas Öberg <jonas AT coyote.org> wrote:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> 
>>>> I was just made aware that in the license chooser, when a user enters
>>>> a URL to attribute the work to, this is stored in different properties
>>>> in the XMP and RDFa formats. In XMP, it's stored in
>>>> xapRights:WebStatement and in RDFa it's stored in cc:attributionURL. I
>>>> understand the difference between the two, but it's not clear to me
>>>> why there is a difference between how the information from the license
>>>> chooser is encoded in the various formats.
>>>> 
>>>> It seems to me that there ought to be a separate field that allows a
>>>> user to specify a WebStatement, and that the URL to attribute the work
>>>> to should be encoded in the cc:attributionURL regardless of what
>>>> format is used.
>>>> 
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>> Jonas
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> cc-devel mailing list
>>>> cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
> _______________________________________________
> cc-devel mailing list
> cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel