- From: Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:29:14 -0400
- To: www-html-editor@w3.org
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>, Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>, Hal Abelson <hal@mit.edu>, Mike Linksvayer <ml@creativecommons.org>
Dear HTML Editors, I'm writing to you as Creative Commons's AC rep with a proposal to add "license" within the XHTML2 namespace of allowable REL attribute values. The goal would be to allow statements as follows: ==== licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/">Creative Commons license</a>. ==== (note that in the current working draft, it would be rel="cc:license") The change for Creative Commons is minor, but it is far more important and interesting for other web users, as it would also allow statements like the following: ==== this source code is available under <a about="source.zip" rel="license" href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdn-files/027/001/901/ ShSourceCLIbetaLicense.htm">Microsoft's Shared Source License</a>. ==== or the following: ==== the photos on this site are available to you under my <a rel="license" href="restrictive-photo-license.html">for-personal-use-only license</a>, which forbids you from redistributing these photos under any circumstance. ==== It is unlikely that Microsoft or this lone photographer would want to use the "cc:license" property for fear that it might confuse people into thinking their work is distributed under a CC license. Of course, the cc:license property, as it stands, pertains to licenses beyond those of Creative Commons, but its CC-qualification may cause confusion. Creative Commons would prefer to use a widely-adopted license property standard: after all, licensing is not a CC-specific concept. We propose that the xhtml2:license property be strictly defined as indicating that the subject is licensed for use under the terms of the object. The object can be *any* license URI, representing anything ranging from a plaintext document to a styled HTML page to a complex RDF graph indicating specific individual rights. The xhtml2:license property should not define the owner of the copyright: we leave that to existing properties like dc:rights. The xhtml2:license property also should not define the licensees, jurisdiction, or other attribute of the license: those details are left to be defined within the license object itself. Note that there is no current XHTML2 or Dublin Core property that properly expresses this pure licensing relationship [1]. Thanks for your consideration of this proposal, -Ben Adida ben@mit.edu / ben@creativecommons.org Member, Creative Commons Technology Advisory Board [1] http://creativecommons.org/technology/metadata/extend
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2005 22:29:24 UTC