W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sweo-ig@w3.org > February 2007

Re: SWEO is in the news :-)

From: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@appmosphere.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 19:08:42 +0100
To: "Paul Walsh, Segala" <paulwalsh@segala.com>
Cc: 'W3C SWEO IG' <public-sweo-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <PM-GA.20070208190842.2974F.2.1D@192.168.27.2>

On 08.02.2007 18:46:38, Ivan Herman wrote:
>Ah! Now I get it. It is a version of your content label ff extension but
>for CC. Yes, that sounds like a nice thing to have indeed!
Oh, maybe I got that wrong, too, then. You mean that google result lists
should have license information embedded per-entry? I.e. you'd do a
random search and could see license information (if available)?
Yeah, that sounds handy. Could make even more sense for vertical
search engines, I guess.

>Caveat: at the moment, the CC content is stored in... HTML comment. That
>is because putting RDF into HTML and still have it valid was not
>possible. *That* is exactly why CC engaged into the RDFa work. But the
>current status may make the extension's life a bit tougher...
Not sure if I can resist to comment on RDFa and HTML validity ;)

benjamin





>
>
>Ivan
>
>Paul Walsh, Segala wrote:
>> Actually, Paul Miller explains it even better than I do in my original post.
>> Perhaps you could have a quick read?
>> http://segala.com/blog/semantic-labels-for-creative-commons-licences 
>> 
>> Many thanks
>> Paul
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org] 
>> Sent: 08 February 2007 09:48
>> To: Paul Walsh, Segala
>> Cc: 'Susie Stephens'; 'W3C SWEO IG'
>> Subject: Re: SWEO is in the news :-)
>> 
>> Paul,
>> 
>> I am not sure what exactly is your question. Is it to give CC license
>> for the results of the projects?
>> 
>> There is also a W3C licence for software (which is, afaik, very liberal)
>> but I am not sure it is 100% the same as one of the CC licences. I know
>> our legal guys are looking at combining these two, and I must admit that
>> I do not really know what the subtle differences are. I *really* prefer
>> to leave that to my legally minded colleagues...
>> 
>> Ivan
>> 
>> Paul Walsh, Segala wrote:
>> 
>>>Thanks Susie.
>>>
>>>Reading the article, we could publish a vocabulary for creative commons.
>>>Should be really easy. I was talking to David earlier about how to get
>>>better adoption. It's kinda like productising a technology as it's easier
>> 
>> to
>> 
>>>sell a product and it is a concept. PEGI for example, has agreed that it
>>>will use Content Labels for online games rating. So, rather than wait for
>>>them to do something, we'll probably create the labels for them.
>>>
>>>What do you think about the creative commons license? It is after all, a
>>>form of conformance claim.
>>>
>>>Look forward to your feedback.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>Paul
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: public-sweo-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sweo-ig-request@w3.org]
>>>On Behalf Of Susie Stephens
>>>Sent: 07 February 2007 15:09
>>>To: 'W3C SWEO IG'
>>>Subject: SWEO is in the news :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>There's an article about SWEO in content wire. :-)
>>>http://www.content-wire.com/FreshPicks/Index.cfm?ccs=86&cs=4391
>>>
>>>Susie
>>>
>>>
>> 
>> 
>
>-- 
>
>Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>PGP Key: http://www.cwi.nl/%7Eivan/AboutMe/pgpkey.html
>FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
Received on Thursday, 8 February 2007 18:10:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:35 GMT