discussion of the Creative Commons Metadata work

[Evan Prodromou <evan AT wikitravel.org>]

>>>>> "ML" == Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org> writes:

    Me> I should have been more clear: I meant the dc:creator and
    Me> dc:contributor elements, included into CC metadata.

    ML> DC does offer some guidance:

    ML> http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/#creator An entity
    ML> primarily responsible for making the content of the resource.

    ML> http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/#contributor An entity
    ML> responsible for making contributions to the content of the
    ML> resource.

    ML> I think these definitions map best to your option (C) --
    ML> "creator" and "contributor" roles are assigned based on the
    ML> relative importance of the contribution.

That's what I figured, but I wasn't sure how closely the CC RDF mapped
to the license requirements. Should I be able to tell from the
metadata who the parties to the license are?

Personally, I'd think that the creator of the current work, even if
they only made trivial modifications, should be listed as the
"creator". They are the party granting a license for the work, after
all.

But since the "Original Author" is identified in the license text
("'Original Author' means the individual or entity who created the
Work."), I thought there was a good argument for listing those parties
who'd created stuff not derived from anything else* as "creators".

~ESP

*Assuming, for the sake of argument, that this is possible.

-- 
Evan Prodromou <evan AT wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide