Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-metadata - Re: [cc-metadata] a rel=meta for license embedding ?

cc-metadata AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: discussion of the Creative Commons Metadata work

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>
  • To: discussion of the Creative Commons Metadata work <cc-metadata AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-metadata] a rel=meta for license embedding ?
  • Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 12:00:07 -0800

On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 12:57 +0100, Sylvain Zimmer wrote:
> We use this for music albums, so there's one <Work> for each track, that
> usually means a lot of RDF...
>
> Moreover, I've got some problems with utf8/iso8859. Currently, we give
> our artists the utf8-encoded rdf and tell them to put it in their
> websites. But as most of their pages are in iso8859, there are some
> validation issues.
>
> Example :
> http://validator.creativecommons.org/validate.py?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpcmontigny.free.fr%2Fliens%2Fliens.html&submit=Parse+URI
>
> We can't ask them whether their pages are in utf8 or iso or whatever,
> it's too complicated.

The validator should probably be more tolerant in this respect, at least
providing a warning instead of blowing up. If you copy & paste the RDF
into http://w3.org/RDF/Validator it is ok.

You could aggressively escape to get around the encoding problem
altogether.

> So it would be ideal to host the rdf ourselves and
> just give them a simple HTML bit linking to it.

I can see the advantages of hosting the RDF yourself regardless of
encoding.

> We can't really use the
> a rel=license I think, because it's not the page that's CC-licensed,
> it's the album... right ?

It isn't precise or accurate, but it is useful, telling Yahoo and Google
that CC licensed content is to be found here, which indeed it can, just
maybe not the page itself.

> I don't really mind yahoo/google not supporting a rel=meta currently, as
> long as it's an official way to do it (so they should add support for it
> in the future.).
>
> So what are your thoughts on this ? Is a rel=meta okay ? Can you think
> of a better way to solve our problem ?

Well, a solution that will probably never be read is a non-solution
obviously. I suspect rel="meta" is that. Another problem is that <a
rel="meta"> is human readable/clickable, and it isn't much help to link
directly to an RDF file in this way. Or were you planning to link to a
page that itself embeds or <link>s to RDF? (Looking again at your
original post, I see style="display:none", hmm.)

One possibly useful solution would be to begin using
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-rdfa-syntax

Maybe
<a rel="rdfs:seeAlso" href="http://jamendo.com/foo/bar.html";>xyz</a>

Or if you want it to be invisible
<link rel="rdfs:seeAlso" href="http://jamendo.com/foo/bar.rdf"/>

--
Mike Linksvayer
http://creativecommons.org/about/people#21





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page