Not necessarily, see the two examples I gave Greg. And there are others which we aren't interested in today, but we should know are possible in the future. For example:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html That page has a ton of stuff that is not part of the GPL itself. Again - that's not what we want to do at this time, but it's conceivable that at some point we might. Dan On Thursday, April 18, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Maarten Zeinstra wrote: > Well actually ideally it would exactly the same document, but with different > css and no js, right? > > Cheers, > > Maarten > -- > Kennisland > | www.kennisland.nl (http://www.kennisland.nl) | t +31205756720 | m > +31643053919 | @mzeinstra > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 18, 2013, at 20:01 , Dan Mills <[email protected] > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > On Thursday, April 18, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Nathan Yergler wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Mike Linksvayer <[email protected] > > > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Kat Walsh <[email protected] > > > > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > > > If we were to do this, the legal code would be maintained in a > > > > > separate file > > > > > from the HTML, in a format that maintained all of the essential > > > > > information. > > > > > For example, formatting such as bold or italic text that has legal > > > > > significance, section headings, etc., would all be considered > > > > > essential and > > > > > part of the legal code itself. This legal code file would likely be > > > > > maintained using Markdown[1], or something similar to it. > > > > > > > > > > The web page with the licenses would be generated from this legal > > > > > code file, > > > > > by converting it to HTML and adding non-legal code formatting, text, > > > > > and > > > > > navigational elements. However, since the legal code file would not > > > > > have to > > > > > be touched, it would be impossible to accidentally make a change to > > > > > the > > > > > legal code itself by changing other elements of the page. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I may have suggested something like this long ago, but I'd probably > > > > stick to HTML as the canonical version now. That canonical HTML should > > > > be as minimal as possible, just including enough structure and > > > > annotation to make it possible for external CSS and Javascript to make > > > > look pretty and dynamically add further annotation in a variety of > > > > contexts, and for plain text to be generated without manual post > > > > processing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > While you could continue to use javascript, etc for injecting that > > > sort of customization, I think the burden for creating and maintaining > > > that sort of code is greater than that for a script that takes a > > > template document and runs in the actual content. > > > > > > > > > I very much agree. Client-side JS absolutely has its place, and I have no > > problems with using it (heavily, if needed), but it's not some sort of > > escape hatch for modifying pages without modifying the page that is served > > up. That's just obfuscation, and it's harder to maintain. > > > > > Regardless of the markup format for the "immutable" document, I think > > > my primary concern is making it easy for a software agent to "follow > > > its nose" from the license URI to the immutable legalcode. (I > > > *thought* there was follow-your-nose markup from the deed to the > > > legalcode, but I don't see it now, so maybe I'm mis-remembering.) > > > Figuring out what the right predicate is shouldn't be super difficult, > > > and would fit in the existing ecosystem. > > > > > > > > > Were you thinking of a link? "The license on this page was generated from > > [link]" ? > > > > > > > > For what it's worth, we added support for "stripped down" legalcode in > > > 2010 (I think). For example, > > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode-plain. That > > > file is generated from the static HTML, and having > > > markdown/restructured text/something less expressive would have made > > > life a little easier. > > > > > > > > > Hah. > > > > Yeah, so that plain format could be close to being acceptable as a *source* > > if we really want to use HTML (modulo the stylesheet and JS tags). > > > > Dan _______________________________________________ > > cc-devel mailing list > > [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel >
_______________________________________________ cc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
