[uf-new] Re: hAudio rel-enclosure & linking issues

[Martin McEvoy]

On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 02:06 +0000, Andy Mabbett wrote: 
> In message <1200096677.5162.33.camel at localhost.localdomain>, Martin
> McEvoy <martin at weborganics.co.uk> writes
> 
> >On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 21:00 +0000, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> 
> >>    *    download
> 
> >>    *    stream
> 
> >I think rel-enclosure is still suitable for the above two examples
> 
> >rel-enclosure is
> [...]
> > any single object,
> >thing that can be downloaded and cached to a users hard drive, or
> >portable device
> 
> In addition to my previous comments about off-site files, I'm not
> convinced that a stream is (as the rel-enclosure spec has it) "intended
> to be cached".
> 

Streams still have to be cached to be played even if it is only in part,
most of the files we talk about are encapsulated streams of some sort?

> >>    *    source
> >>
> >>         for links to .html files, etc., which link in turn to one of
> >> the
> >>         above.
> >
> >you may be on to something here a link pointing to a page where a file
> >may be downloaded but is not a rel="payment" url
> 
> Even if it is a payment URL. The payment page may not link directly to
> the file.
> 

True!

> 
> >if you are pointing to a html file you can use a bit of POSH
> >rel="section" may be a better way of indicating that the following page
> >is to be considered part or the referencing document and we are not
> >inventing something new?
> 
> If site A links to a page on site "B" which inks to file "C", that does
> not make the page on "B" a section of that on "A".
> 

No it doesn't:

Section
Refers to a document serving as a section in a collection of documents.
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-links

rel values have implied meanings not actual meanings, they also help
navigation through a collection of documents.

> 
> 
> >> If rel-license becomes part of hAudio (a no-brainer, surely?),
> >
> >I think the use of rel-licence already implicitly exists in haudio it
> >just hasn't been discussed yet, i don't see anything wrong with adopting
> >rel-licence
> >
> >+1 from me anyway ;)
> 
> Though of course, current practise may not be to have license terms as
> links. The text:
> 
>         <p>The following mp3 is in the public domain.</p>
> 
> requires a CLASS, not a REL.
> 

Again I AM inclined to agree with you Andy,

but class="licence" is something specific maybe:

<div class="licence">
...hereby either (a) certifies that, to the best of his knowledge, the
work of authorship identified... blah..
</div>

maybe just:

<div class="licence">
&copy; 2008 my record company
</div>

In the case of cc licences would you put a rel value in there too?

<div class="licence">
cc <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/deed.en_GB"
rel="license">Public Domain Licence</a>
</div>

there seems to be a conflict of values

licence => href => licence

class licence seems to be redundant as the href value already describes
a link to where a licence may be read? 

this maybe needs to be an exploratory discussion? into a licence
microformat?  more expanded than the one cc-licences generally use ie
rel="licence"? 

<span class="licence vcard">
&copy; <span class="rev">2008</span> 
<a href="http://www.subpop.com/" class="url fn org">Sub Pop Records</a>,
 <span class="note">All rights Reserved</span>
</span>

> 
> 
> 
> I think there is a general issue with requiring @rels where publishers
> normally use text, not links; contrary to:
> 
>         <http://microformats.org/wiki/microformats>
> 
>         "microformats are not... an attempt to get everyone to change
>         their behavior..."
> 
> and:
> 
>         <http://microformats.org/wiki/principles>
> 
>         "adapt to current behaviors".
> 
> 
> Though I see no reason why microformats should not use both, with the
> same value.
> 
> In other words
> 
>         <foo class="value">  ==  <a rel="value">
> 
> 
> That would also be beneficial for Wikis such as ours, where rel values
> cannot be used by editors.
> 
> [Issue logged at <http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-issues#Open_issues> ]

Wiki's are another matter entirely to the general web, most wiki's
(including our own) are built with all external links  using
rel="nofollow" this is purely for SEO purposes (This is my view).
Contributors cite relevant external sources, pertinent to the subject or
original source that it cites, and no weight is added to the link?, the
source gets no credit as far as ranking is concerned (PR), I cant
imagine any wiki will ever remove this restriction as it deters SEO's,
Spammers, builds Internal linking, thus enhancing ranking (PR).

Maybe this is one anti-pattern (that our wise community created) that
needs to be dealt with before you start thinking about HOW to work round
it? maybe some evangelism in correct usage.

Thanks
Martin McEvoy