W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-annotation@w3.org > November 2015

Re: Content License Expression?

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 04:35:18 +0800
Cc: Benjamin Young <bigbluehat@hypothes.is>, W3C Public Annotation List <public-annotation@w3.org>
Message-Id: <724AC95E-938C-4F8E-9FE6-9A53BE1A1688@w3.org>
To: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
It may indeed be in scope; in any case, discussing it through an issue is probably a good idea (even if the group may decide not to follow up on it).


> On 5 Nov 2015, at 04:05, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:
> We also had an early request from the Creative Commons folks that the model should explicitly say how licenses can be associated with resources.   Any proposal here would need to be clear as to the extent of the license, e.g. that it only covers the resource it is associated with and not any resources otherwise referenced from that resource ... so a license on the Annotation does not convey any rights regarding either Body or Target.
> If we want to consider this in scope, then I can raise an issue and proposal.
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Benjamin Young <bigbluehat@hypothes.is <mailto:bigbluehat@hypothes.is>> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Should we specify a method for stating the license of quotations in relation to TextQuoteSelector (rashly assuming a license can be programmatically found for the target's contents)?
> Relatedly, I'm also wondering if we need this ability for the annotation and/or bodies themselves (if they're inlined at least).
> For instance, publicly visibile Hypothes.is annotation are released under the terms of the CreativeCommons.org CC0 license (essentially "Public Domain"). That said, we don't currently express that in the JSON anywhere (but would like too!), and if/when we do that, it would be best to *not* unintentionally state that the highlighted text (which is included in the TextQuoteSelector) be considered to be under that same license.
> We certainly accommodate this granularity now (with the improved multiple bodies work), but do we need to specify it explicitly? or leave that up to other vocabularies and implementations to work out?
> Thanks!
> Benjamin
> --
> Developer Advocate
> http://hypothes.is/ <http://hypothes.is/>
> --
> Rob Sanderson
> Information Standards Advocate
> Digital Library Systems and Services
> Stanford, CA 94305

Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704

Received on Wednesday, 4 November 2015 20:35:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:42 UTC