W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa@w3.org > August 2010

Re: RDFa, FUD and ethics

From: Keith Alexander <k.j.w.alexander@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 00:01:13 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTimBhot=h4HY5HMHwc1MineDt0O=dhj6LVUDpnG_@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
Cc: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, Public RDFa <public-rdfa@w3.org>, "Clark, Lin" <lin.w.clark@gmail.com>

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Mark Birbeck
<mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com> wrote:

> Is it not possible to make one of the configuration questions a clear
> question about whether the user would like to enable certain features?
> I don't mean "Would you like RDFa support?", but more like "Would you
> like to allow sites to crawl your xyz data so that they can foobar?"
> There could be some links and explanatory text so that people knew
> what is going on, and how they would benefit from exposing their data.

Since RDFa is only exposing data that is already public, and since "do
you want RDFa?" might be an over-technical question for some people, a
good way of making Drupal users aware of the possibility for re-using
the data they publish could be to ask them to give it a  license (or
waiver [1]), making the terms for that reuse explicit.

A parallel could be the way Flickr gives users the ability to attach
various licenses to their own photos, but whereas the Flickr default
is the most restrictive option (full copyright),  it would probably be
more appropriate for the Drupal default to be a very permissive
option, like CC0 [2].

Are there already plans for including license/waiver declarations in the RDFa?


[1] http://vocab.org/waiver/terms/
[2] http://creativecommons.org/choose/zero/
Received on Monday, 9 August 2010 23:03:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:15:07 UTC