Hello Bob, Bob Wyman wrote: > James, > My apologies if these questions and comments have been dealt with > before: > * What is the expected or intended relationship between data carried > in the atom:rights element and data pointed to by the license relationship?
The relationship is subtle, but important, consider the following example pulled from draft-07 that I just published: <feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"> <id>http://www.example.com/myfeed</id> <title>My Example Feed</title> <updated>2005-07-28T12:00:00Z</updated> <link href="http://www.example.com/myfeed" /> <link rel="license" type="application/rdf+xml" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdf" /> <rights> Copyright (c) 2005. Some rights reserved. This feed is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribute-NonCommercial Use License. It contains material originally published by Jane Smith at http://www.example.com/entries/1 under the Creative Commons Attribute License. </rights> <author><name>James</name></author> <entry> <id>tag:entries.org,2005:1</td> <title>Atom Powered Robots Run Amok</title> <updated>2005-06-28T12:00:00Z</updated> <link href="http://www.example.org/entries/1" /> <summary>Atom Powered Robots Run Amok</summary> <author><name>Jane Smith</name></author> <link rel="license" type="text/html" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/" /> </entry> </feed> Note that the feed level rights element covers the attribute requirement of the contained element. The distinction is similar to NOTICE and LICENSE files distributed with many open source projects. > * Why did you choose the word "license" when Atom itself uses the > word "rights" for a very similar (if not identical) concept? Because I specifically wanted to differentiate the two. > * If the intent of the license link is to provide a mechanism to > support "out of line" rights elements, then did you consider doing something > similar to the handling of out-of-line atom: content via a "src" attribute? > For example: Does the license link do anything that would not be > accomplished by adding support for rights elements in the following form: > <rights src="http://..."/> > Changing the atom:rights element via an extension is out of the question. The rights element is what it is. > * If a feed reader discovers both atom:rights and a license link in > a single entry or feed, is there any concept of precedence between the two? > For instance, if the text of the license is more or less restrictive than > what is in the atom:rights element, what should the reader assume about the > rights that are granted? > The two serve different, but related, purposes. The two should not contradict each other. If they do, consumers must go back to the content publisher to resolve the problem. - James