- From: Víctor Rodríguez Doncel <victorr@ac.upc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:44:31 +0100
- To: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
- CC: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>, Joakim Söderberg <joakim.soderberg@ericsson.com>, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>, public-media-annotation@w3.org
Dear Raphaël, My objection about "xmpRights:WebStatement" (which I understand is the closest) is that the "license" is remote and this could hinder its use (e.g. think of a non-connected situation). Having a remote pointer is fine, but allowing an inline license would be better, hence my comment... Regards, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel Raphaël Troncy escribió: > > Dear Victor, > >> I wonder whether this text fields could be improved so that they >> include richer information. For example, a RDF version of a >> CreativeCommons license (appart from the CC symbols, there is a RDF >> version to express "Non-Commercial" etc.), or a pattern License in >> whichever Rights Expression Language etc. >> >> Wouldn´t it be nice having a picture and its licensing terms together? > > Absolutely! We have already discussed that on the mailing list, see > for example: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2008Oct/0003.html > > > Furthermore, we have discussed that issue during the face to face > meeting in Cannes, with the PLING working group (see > http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-mediaann-minutes.html#item05) > > So, YES, we should have a placeholder for pointing to machine readable > and human readable licence, but it seems to me that XMP allows already > to do that via the properties "xmpRights:Certificate" and/or > "xmpRights:WebStatement" that both have values a URL that can point to > such a licence. > > Best regards. > > Raphaël >
Received on Friday, 7 November 2008 10:45:10 UTC