Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-metadata - Re: [cc-metadata] Where's the machine code?

cc-metadata AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: discussion of the Creative Commons Metadata work

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Gisle Hannemyr" <gisle AT ifi.uio.no>
  • To: cc-metadata AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [cc-metadata] Where's the machine code?
  • Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 05:20:32 +0200 (CEST)

As far as I able to tell, the current generator for CC licenses (ver. 3.0)
does not generate /any/ metadata.

I happen to think this is a bad thing, because when people copy and paste
this code, there will be a number of CC-licenced works out there without
proper metadata attached.

For instance, for the unported "Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License"):
http://creativecommons.org/license/results-one?q_1=2&q_1=1&field_commercial=yes&field_derivatives=yes&field_jurisdiction=&field_format=&field_worktitle=&field_attribute_to_name=&field_attribute_to_url=&field_sourceurl=&field_morepermissionsurl=&lang=en_US&language=en_US&n_questions=3

Back in April, there was a brief thread about this on the list titled
"Where's the machine code?", that was answered by Mike Linksvayer (Tue Apr
17 20):

> We're just not using the ugly RDF/XML-embedded-in-HTML-comments
> anymore. Explanatory blog post forthcoming.

If one reads the FAQ, the official policy is that RDF is in use:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#Why_did_Creative_Commons_choose_to_use_the_RDF_format_for_its_metadata.3F

That is also the impression one gets from these pagea:
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Metadata
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Implement_Metadata


So waht is the current status on this.
Has that explanatory blog post come forth?
--
Gisle Hannemyr ( http://hannemyr.com/ )





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page