cc-metadata AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: discussion of the Creative Commons Metadata work
List archive
- From: "Shelley Powers" <shelleyp AT burningbird.net>
- To: "Aaron Swartz" <me AT aaronsw.com>
- Cc: <metadata AT creativecommons.org>, "Ben Hammersley" <ben AT benhammersley.com>
- Subject: RE: questions on the RDF/XML
- Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:06:45 -0600
ions on the RDF/XML
>
>
> Shelley Powers wrote:
> > I use a string literal for dc:creator
>
> Maybe you should fix this.
>
And exactly who made you expert on Dublin Core? Should we tell the DC folks
that they have to fix their examples.
Aaron -- your assumptions of correctness as to interpretation about what is
or is not correct use of DC elements is going to put this CC license into
conflict with other uses. To me, this makes the use of the RDF/XML suspect.
You want to bring Dave Beckett in here and tell him that he's wrong, and to
fix the DC document? And then do you want to bring in the Trotts and have
them fix Moveable Type? And then do you want to bring in Dave Winer and have
him fix Radio and all of the RSS 2.0 implementations. And then there's
Amphetadesk, and News is Free, and...
Do you hear what I'm saying at this moment?
Creative Commons will not win adherants with responses such as "well, fix
it".
> > But, if we can't modify the CC RDF/XML because it could invalidate the
> > license (and that's
> > the better approach -- no confusion this way)
>
> The only thing that could possibly be affected here is cc:License
> element and it's not even clear that's necessary. So feel free to
> modify it.
>
Modify 'it' -- you mean the values? Or the element's themselves?
> > if we include the cc:License information [...] I could keep my
> > dc:rights and
> > dc:creator as currently defined in my vocabulary use of same, which
> > matches
> > the DC documentation of same?
>
> Sure.
>
You all know this is legal stuff, right? This isn't the usual semantic web
that doens't impact on the world at large stuff. So it's real important to
be consistent and specific.
I'm assuming by this that I can do anything I want with the RDF/XML, which
means it really isn't all that meaningful for Creative Commons licensing --
the visible button and link to the license is the only thing that's
important.
Shelley
> --
> Aaron Swartz [http://www.aaronsw.com]
>
>
>
-
questions on the RDF/XML,
Shelley Powers, 12/25/2002
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: questions on the RDF/XML, Aaron Swartz, 12/26/2002
- FW: questions on the RDF/XML, Shelley Powers, 12/26/2002
-
Re: questions on the RDF/XML,
Aaron Swartz, 12/26/2002
-
RE: questions on the RDF/XML,
Shelley Powers, 12/26/2002
-
Re: questions on the RDF/XML,
Ben Hammersley, 12/26/2002
- Re: questions on the RDF/XML, Lisa Rein, 12/26/2002
-
RE: questions on the RDF/XML,
Shelley Powers, 12/26/2002
-
Re: questions on the RDF/XML,
Aaron Swartz, 12/27/2002
- RE: questions on the RDF/XML, Shelley Powers, 12/27/2002
-
Re: questions on the RDF/XML,
Aaron Swartz, 12/27/2002
- Re: questions on the RDF/XML, Aaron Swartz, 12/27/2002
-
Re: questions on the RDF/XML,
Aaron Swartz, 12/27/2002
-
RE: questions on the RDF/XML,
Shelley Powers, 12/27/2002
-
Re: questions on the RDF/XML,
Ben Hammersley, 12/28/2002
- Re: questions on the RDF/XML, Ben Hammersley, 12/28/2002
-
string literal dc:creator is valid (was: questions on the RDF/XML),
Aaron Swartz, 12/28/2002
- Re: string literal dc:creator is valid (was: questions on the RDF/XML), Ben Hammersley, 12/28/2002
-
Re: questions on the RDF/XML,
Ben Hammersley, 12/28/2002
-
RE: questions on the RDF/XML,
Shelley Powers, 12/27/2002
-
Re: questions on the RDF/XML,
Ben Hammersley, 12/26/2002
-
RE: questions on the RDF/XML,
Shelley Powers, 12/26/2002
-
Re: questions on the RDF/XML,
Aaron Swartz, 12/26/2002
- Re: questions on the RDF/XML, Lisa Rein, 12/26/2002
- questions on the RDF/XML, Shelley Powers, 12/26/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.