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: Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>
  • To: discussion of the Creative Commons Metadata work <cc-metadata AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-metadata] Where's the machine code?
  • Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 00:02:13 -0700

On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 09:45 +0200, Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
> First, I understand that the rel="license" is metadata, and that it works
> as a microformat. (Btw. the rel="license" was also used in prior versions
> of the machine code, i.e. those with RDF in HTML-comments.)

Happens to be both a uF and RDFa. Was actually introduced long after
RDF/XML-in-a-HTML-comment was first provided.

> The bit I am asking about, is the bit of metadata that explicitly told the
> machine what was permitted, prohibited, and required.

That was never appropriate to be included with the licensed work, which
cannot define what is permitted etc by the license. The license does
this and is referenced by the work.

> I must admit that I am not familiar with RFDa.
> I did visit http://rdfa.info , as well as read through
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-rdfa-primer/ , but I have a lot to learn.
> RDFa looks like a good idea, and I think I understand how one can use RFDa
> to express the same thing as one expressed in commented RDF before.
>
> My problem is that I can't find any RFDa in the current machine readable
> cc licenses.
>
> The W3C documents states "We note that RDFa makes use of XML namespaces."
> In the (X)HTML license templates generated by the
> chooser ( http://creativecommons.org/license ). Yet, I can't see any use
> of namespaces in the current licenses.

There's always a default namespace.

> You also write: "If you provide any of the optional fields in the chooser
> (...) those are also encoded as RDFa."
>
> I tried to generate a license with optional fields (by-nc-nd) - and this
> is how the machine readable version looks like:
>
> <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/";>
> <img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0"
> src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-nd/3.0/88x31.png"; />
> </a>
> <br />
> This work is licensed under a
> <a rel="license"
> href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/";>Creative Commons
> Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License</a>.
>
> I don't understand what part of this code that is supposed to be RDFa.

I think you misunderstand what Nathan meant by "optional fields" -- on
http://creativecommons.org/license/ click "Click to include more
information about your work."

Mike


--
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/User:Mike_Linksvayer





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page