On 4/10/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

The problem is that, from a specification point of view, the licensing in plain old RSS (without any extensions) is NOT meant to be machine readable.  (Note, what I'm talking about here is the RSS <copyright> element.)

And a valid RSS reader does NOT have to do anything based on that -- does NOT have to do anything baswd on what's in the contents of the RSS <copyright> element.  (And a valid RSS reader also does NOT have to understand or do anything based on any RSS extensions that may make this licensing information machine readable.)
 
If you really want to get licensing information or "permissions", "restrictions", and "requirements" tied into there, then you really need to make a new technology... possibly via an RSS extension... that replaces <enclosure> but ties in the concept of "permissions", "restrictions", and "requirements".


Well there already is a creative commons extension to RSS which I think most people are using.

It sounds like what you're talking about is getting all the aggregators to obey ... and that's a whole other thing.  Wether its in the cc extension, or in MediaRSS, or in some new revamp of enclosures ... none of those options are going to force web services to obey them any more than any other ...

There's always going to be custom spiders and what not that ignore that data no mater how its encoded into the feed.  But from the persepctive of this list, we're not aggregator programers, we're content producers ... it's not incombant on us to make media readers that obey license... its only our job to make sure we have the license information in there.

Seems like we should take advantage of what we have ... the cc extension ... thats why RSS is so great it can be extended.

- Dave

--
http://www.DavidMeade.com
feed:  http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed


SPONSORED LINKS
Fireant Individual Use


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to