W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > November 2008

Re: Reminder: XMP review

From: Tobias Bürger <tobias.buerger@sti2.at>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:59:28 +0100
Message-ID: <49141F90.10201@sti2.at>
To: Víctor Rodríguez Doncel <victorr@ac.upc.edu>
CC: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>, Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>, Joakim Söderberg <joakim.soderberg@ericsson.com>, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>, public-media-annotation@w3.org

Dear Victor,

the intention of the WebStatement element is not to exclude the
possibility to embedd license data in XMP but rather to provide an
additional unchangable license description at some point on the Web to
which you can point to (if I understand it correctly).

The rationale of this element is nicely explained on the Creative
Commons site [1]  who encourage the embedding of creative commons
licences in XMP [2].


[1] http://wiki.creativecommons.org/XMP
[2] http://wiki.creativecommons.org/WebStatement

Best,

Tobias

Víctor Rodríguez Doncel schrieb:
>
> 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
>>
>
>

-- 
_________________________________________________
Dipl.-Inf. Univ. Tobias Bürger

STI Innsbruck
University of Innsbruck, Austria
http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/

tobias.buerger@sti2.at
__________________________________________________
Received on Friday, 7 November 2008 10:59:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 7 November 2008 10:59:49 GMT