rellicense-issues-fr: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(to be translated - link vers fr translation html spec) |
m (Reverted edits by RolliCpasr (Talk) to last version by Tantek) |
| (5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |
(No difference)
| |
Latest revision as of 22:18, 20 December 2008
Problématiques
Problématiques soulevées par le microformat rel-license :
- 21 juin 2005 : soulevée par Hixie
- Issue H-1: This specification is lacking a user agent conformance section. There's basically nothing that says how rel=license must be handled.
- ACCEPTED. The specification should have a conformance section describing what UAs should do.
- Issue H-2: What's the point of rel="license"?
- ACCEPTED. The specification should provide better documentation explaining this (it tries to now, but obviously failed for this particular reader). In particular rel="license" enables a content author to explicitly express in a machine readable way what license(s) the content is licensed under, in particular, by using licenses that reside at external URLs, commonly maintained by various open source and related organizations.
- Issue H-1: This specification is lacking a user agent conformance section. There's basically nothing that says how rel=license must be handled.
- 9 décembre 2005 soulevée par Kenny Heaton
- There needs to be an explicit explanation of when to use rel-license which "Indicates that the referred resource is a license for the referring page.", and when to use the W3C defined copyright link type which "Refers to a copyright statement for the current document." since copyright and licensing are similar concepts and can be confused.
- ACCEPTED. MOVE TO FAQ. The HTML 4.01 spec defines the 'copyright' rel value as: "Refers to a copyright statement for the current document." Indeed this is very similar to the license provision, however not exactly the same. Often documents have a their own local copyright statement which includes links to one or more licenses. See the XFN home page for example, which uses both a
<link rel="copyright>in the header to reference a local copyright statement, and within that, links to a Creative Commons license with rel="license".
- ACCEPTED. MOVE TO FAQ. The HTML 4.01 spec defines the 'copyright' rel value as: "Refers to a copyright statement for the current document." Indeed this is very similar to the license provision, however not exactly the same. Often documents have a their own local copyright statement which includes links to one or more licenses. See the XFN home page for example, which uses both a
- There needs to be an explicit explanation of when to use rel-license which "Indicates that the referred resource is a license for the referring page.", and when to use the W3C defined copyright link type which "Refers to a copyright statement for the current document." since copyright and licensing are similar concepts and can be confused.
- 2006-04-07 raised by Evan
- Issue 1: It's not clear how to associate a license with part of a page, such as an image or embedded object in the page, or a single news entry on a news page. A typical use-case would be a Flickr page, for which the image is licensed under a CC license but the page itself is not.
- Issue 2: there's not a clear explanation of how/when to use a <link> element with rel='copyright' (as defined in the HTML spec) and an <a> element with rel='license'.
- Issue 3: the Dublin Core 'license' element seems to have the exact same semantics as this standard. There's an encoding standard for Dublin Core in <meta> and <link> elements, which seems like it would be an easy extension to rel attributes in <a> elements. Can we find some compatibility between the Dublin Core 'license' and rel='license'?