[uf-discuss] rel="license" and copyright
Charles Iliya Krempeaux
supercanadian at gmail.com
Sat Nov 18 00:06:14 PST 2006
On 11/17/06, Chris Messina <chris.messina at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think that makes any sense. You should make positive
> assertions about data, not negative ones...
Andy is in fact trying to make a negative assertion, of the "license" token.
> and why bother with a
> "not-a-license" schema? There's far too many negatives... as in
> licenses that it wouldn't be....
Andy might want to name one (or a few) specific licenses that it is not.
> I think we ought only deal with what things *are* and not what they *aren't*.
That's fine, but they you need to put the "negative" into the token...
as in "nolicense" or something like that.
> On 11/17/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <supercanadian at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello Andy,
> > On 11/17/06, Andy Mabbett <andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm starting to look at using rel="license". Am I right in thing that it
> > > can be used to indicate that a page is NOT available under a license, as
> > > well as for those that are? For instance:
> > >
> > > This page is <a rel="license"
> > > href="http://www.example.com/copyright>copyright Example Ltd.
> > > 2006</a> and may not be reproduced.
> > I think that to indicate that something is NOT available under a
> > certain license you'd really need something like a "norel" attribute.
> > As in...
> > <a norel="license" href="...">...</a>
> > Or... you'd need a negative of the "license" token... maybe
> > "nolicense" to use with the "rel" attribute... as in...
> > <a rel="nolicense" href="...">...</a>
> > See ya
Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
charles @ reptile.ca
supercanadian @ gmail.com
developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
More information about the microformats-discuss