Hi Richard, gosh, that is indeed entirely new, not only to me but also to the librarians who have used DSpace for a longer time now as well. This is indeed confusing.
So thank you very much for clarifying this! The only thing that I would like to know is how I can change the "target" of that iFrame, which is now the 3.0 generic license, to the CC license that we want to use, i.e. the Canadian 2.5 version .. and I cannot find any setting / file where that is set. Do you know that? cheers maike On 9-Jan-08, at 6:23 AM, Richard Rodgers wrote: > Hi Maike: > > A few explanations to help unravel the enigma: > First, you should understand that there are two different licenses > involved > here, not a choice of one. The first - the deposit license - is > (roughly) > a licence that the depositor grants to the repository. It is not > optional, > and does not display to users in the item display. For many > institutions, > it is a legal requirement. It is a standard 'click-thru' license in > the > sense that the grantor can only accept or reject it (as you note). The > license.default you mention contains this license text. > The second - CC license - is (roughly) a license > that an author grants to consumers of her work. It is entirely > optional > (as you note with the cc-enable property), and *does* prominently > display to > users in the item page. Here, the submitter *can* choose from a set > of licenses > that reflect the desire to control/share content. > > What is confusing is that they both appear in the submission work-flow > (first CC, then deposit), and the the CC is a mini-workflow in itself > consisting if steps in an Iframe. Many have lamented the 'brittle' > Iframe, but it was the only programmatic access we had when it was > first > offered. Now there are 'web'service' interfaces to CC that should > probably > be adopted (volunteers welcome!). > > Hope this helps, > > Richard > > Quoting Maike Dulk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Hi >> >> I noticed some really strange behaviour in our DSpace installation. >> >> It is the Creative Commons licensing. >> >> When the setting in dspace.cfg is set to true >> >> #### Creative Commons settings ###### >> # are Creative Commons licenses used in submission? >> webui.submit.enable-cc = true >> >> the Creative Commons section of the submission process has TWO >> separate steps. The first one is the one that has the iFrame that >> displays the Creative Commons webpage in it, and there are two >> choices >> that the submitter can set before accepting the license. >> After that, there is another step that asks another time whether the >> submitter wants to accept the Creative Commons license. This page is >> much simpler and has no choices, only two buttons - either "I Grant >> the License" or "I Do Not Grant the License" . >> >> The strange thing is that the first stage points to a version of the >> CC license that is NOT the one that we want to use, and that I have >> entered in the default.license config file. We want to use the >> Canadian 2.5 license, but it displays - AND attaches - the generic >> 3.0 >> CC license. >> That second stage does point to the Canadian 2.5 version license - >> but >> it is apparently discarded. >> >> The strangeness becomes more apparent when I do this: >> >> #### Creative Commons settings ###### >> # are Creative Commons licenses used in submission? >> webui.submit.enable-cc = false >> >> In that case, there is no longer the first step (the iFrame one) - >> but >> the second step (the one with the url to the Canadian version and the >> "I Grant the License" or "I Do Not Grant the License" buttons) STILL >> comes up. But submissions do not have the CC license attached .. >> which >> does make some sense, since it is disabled. >> >> >> So I'd really like to know: >> - what makes this second step appear even though the CC is disabled >> in >> dspace.cfg? >> - How can I turn it off? >> - where can I make the first CC license point to the right CC license >> version (Canadian 2.5) ? It is not in the default.license .. since >> that is set to the Canadian one. >> - if we could get the second step to work with the right CC version >> that would be even better, since it is much simpler than that brittle >> iFrame mechanism >> >> My gosh, this is *complex*. >> >> thanks in advance, >> maike >> >> ---------- >> Maike Dulk - Programmer / Analyst >> McPherson Library, University of Victoria >> (t) 250-886-5709 / (e) [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> -- Harthon gerithach aeair vilui / I hope you will have kind seas >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. >> It's the best place to buy or sell services for >> just about anything Open Source. >> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace >> _______________________________________________ >> DSpace-tech mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-tech >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ DSpace-tech mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-tech
