W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2010

[whatwg] img copyright attribute

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 06:43:20 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1001190507340.3970@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, will surgent wrote:
>
> It would be nice if there was a copyright attribute for the HTML 5 img 
> tag. This would make it easy for users and search engines to filter out 
> images that can not be used for certain purposes.

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, Jonny Barnes wrote:
> 
> Or maybe a license attribute instead, that would include copyrighted 
> work and stuff licensed under some CC or alternative.

On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> 
> This is one of the things microdata/RDFa are meant to do.

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, Philip J?genstedt wrote:
> 
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/microdata.html#examples-4

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, will surgent wrote:
>
> Hmm I didn't know about that. Thanks!

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010, Dawid Czyzewski wrote:
>
> And why img only? this would also be good for audio and video.

On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, will surgent wrote:
>
> That sounds like good idea (about the audio and video elements being
> included as-well). I just thought of it because Google does not allow one to
> specify the copyright or license in an image search as far as I know. having
> a license attribute would make it intuitive for developers to add the
> license the same way title and alt attributes are specified.

On Tue, 12 Jan 2010, timeless wrote:
> 
> external metadata on copyright is a disaster. it gets lost immediately.
> 
> GIF and friends have supported embedding (c) into images for decades.
> 
> As google is fully capable of caching images (and obviously does so), I 
> question how adding a tag to html will solve a problem which is already 
> solved by the native image formats themselves.
> 
> For lack of a more useful reference about comment fields, i'll just 
> point to one application which is aware of them (although at the time of 
> the posting it only supported them for certain image types): 
> http://www.group42.com/ts-wi04.htm

Based on the above comments, I haven't changed anything -- the work 
vocabulary pretty much already addresses this use case in HTML, and 
addressing it in other formats is a problem for another working group.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 18 January 2010 22:43:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:20 UTC