rel="license" and copyright

I'm starting to look at using rel="license". Am I
right in thing that it
can be used to indicate that a page is NOT available under a
license, as
well as for those that are? For instance:

        This page is <a rel="license"
        href="http://
www.example.com/copyright>copyright Example Ltd.
        2006</a> and may not be reproduced.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
                Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: 
<http://www.no2id.net/>

                Free Our Data:  <http://www.freeourd
ata.org.uk>
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

Hello Andy,

On 11/17/06, Andy Mabbett <andypigsonthewing.org.uk>
wrote:
>
> I'm starting to look at using rel="license".
Am I right in thing that it
> can be used to indicate that a page is NOT available
under a license, as
> well as for those that are? For instance:
>
>         This page is <a rel="license"
>         href="http://
www.example.com/copyright>copyright Example Ltd.
>         2006</a> and may not be reproduced.

I think that to indicate that something is NOT available
under a
certain license you'd really need something like a
"norel" attribute.
As in...

<a norel="license"
href="...">...</a>

Or... you'd need a negative of the "license"
token... maybe
"nolicense" to use with the "rel"
attribute... as in...

<a rel="nolicense"
href="...">...</a>


See ya

-- 
    Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.

    charles  reptile.ca
    supercanadian  gmail.com

    developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

I don't think that makes any sense. You should make positive
assertions about data, not negative ones... and why bother
with a
"not-a-license" schema? There's far too many
negatives... as in
licenses that it wouldn't be.... I think we ought only deal
with what
things *are* and not what they *aren't*.

Chris

On 11/17/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <supercanadiangmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Andy,
>
> On 11/17/06, Andy Mabbett <andypigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > I'm starting to look at using
rel="license". Am I right in thing that it
> > can be used to indicate that a page is NOT
available under a license, as
> > well as for those that are? For instance:
> >
> >         This page is <a rel="license"
> >         href="http://
www.example.com/copyright>copyright Example Ltd.
> >         2006</a> and may not be reproduced.
>
> I think that to indicate that something is NOT
available under a
> certain license you'd really need something like a
"norel" attribute.
> As in...
>
> <a norel="license"
href="...">...</a>
>
> Or... you'd need a negative of the "license"
token... maybe
> "nolicense" to use with the "rel"
attribute... as in...
>
> <a rel="nolicense"
href="...">...</a>
>
>
> See ya
>
> --
>     Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
>
>     charles  reptile.ca
>     supercanadian  gmail.com
>
>     developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discussmicroformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss
>


-- 
Chris Messina
Citizen Provocateur &
  Open Source Ambassador-at-Large
Work: http://citizenagency.com
Blog: http://factoryjoe.com/blog

Cell: 412 225-1051
Skype: factoryjoe
This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ]
private
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

Hello,

On 11/17/06, Chris Messina <chris.messinagmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think that makes any sense. You should make
positive
> assertions about data, not negative ones...

Why?

Andy is in fact trying to make a negative assertion, of the
"license" token.

> and why bother with a
> "not-a-license" schema? There's far too many
negatives... as in
> licenses that it wouldn't be....

Andy might want to name one (or a few) specific licenses
that it is not.

> I think we ought only deal with what things *are* and
not what they *aren't*.

That's fine, but they you need to put the
"negative" into the token...
as in "nolicense" or something like that.


See ya

>
> Chris
>
> On 11/17/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux
<supercanadiangmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello Andy,
> >
> > On 11/17/06, Andy Mabbett <andypigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm starting to look at using
rel="license". Am I right in thing that it
> > > can be used to indicate that a page is NOT
available under a license, as
> > > well as for those that are? For instance:
> > >
> > >         This page is <a
rel="license"
> > >         href="http://
www.example.com/copyright>copyright Example Ltd.
> > >         2006</a> and may not be
reproduced.
> >
> > I think that to indicate that something is NOT
available under a
> > certain license you'd really need something like a
"norel" attribute.
> > As in...
> >
> > <a norel="license"
href="...">...</a>
> >
> > Or... you'd need a negative of the
"license" token... maybe
> > "nolicense" to use with the
"rel" attribute... as in...
> >
> > <a rel="nolicense"
href="...">...</a>
> >
> >
> > See ya


-- 
    Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.

    charles  reptile.ca
    supercanadian  gmail.com

    developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

The _link_ itself isn't a negative assertion; the negative
assertion
is in the rights conferered on others by the license that is
linked
to. "Copyright Me, All Rights Reserved" is a good
a legal license a
"Free For All, Help Yourself".

The URI could be to the copyright office.

Regards, etc...
David

On 11/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <supercanadiangmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 11/17/06, Chris Messina <chris.messinagmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't think that makes any sense. You should
make positive
> > assertions about data, not negative ones...
>
> Why?
>
> Andy is in fact trying to make a negative assertion, of
the "license" token.
>
> > and why bother with a
> > "not-a-license" schema? There's far too
many negatives... as in
> > licenses that it wouldn't be....
>
> Andy might want to name one (or a few) specific
licenses that it is not.
>
> > I think we ought only deal with what things *are*
and not what they *aren't*.
>
> That's fine, but they you need to put the
"negative" into the token...
> as in "nolicense" or something like that.
>
>
> See ya
>
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > On 11/17/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux
<supercanadiangmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hello Andy,
> > >
> > > On 11/17/06, Andy Mabbett <andypigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm starting to look at using
rel="license". Am I right in thing that it
> > > > can be used to indicate that a page is
NOT available under a license, as
> > > > well as for those that are? For
instance:
> > > >
> > > >         This page is <a
rel="license"
> > > >         href="http://
www.example.com/copyright>copyright Example Ltd.
> > > >         2006</a> and may not be
reproduced.
> > >
> > > I think that to indicate that something is
NOT available under a
> > > certain license you'd really need something
like a "norel" attribute.
> > > As in...
> > >
> > > <a norel="license"
href="...">...</a>
> > >
> > > Or... you'd need a negative of the
"license" token... maybe
> > > "nolicense" to use with the
"rel" attribute... as in...
> > >
> > > <a rel="nolicense"
href="...">...</a>
> > >
> > >
> > > See ya
>
>
> --
>     Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
>
>     charles  reptile.ca
>     supercanadian  gmail.com
>
>     developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discussmicroformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss
>


-- 
David Janes
Founder, BlogMatrix
http://www.blogmatrix.com
http://www.onamine.com
http://blogmatrix.bl
ogmatrix.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

Hello,

On 11/18/06, Andy Mabbett <andypigsonthewing.org.uk>
wrote:
>
> I'm starting to look at using rel="license".
Am I right in thing that it
> can be used to indicate that a page is NOT available
under a license, as
> well as for those that are? For instance:
>
>        This page is <a rel="license"
>        href="http://
www.example.com/copyright>copyright Example Ltd.
>        2006</a> and may not be reproduced.

If it's not published under a certain licence but
copyrighted (like in
this case), you should use rel="copyright" instead
of rel-licence.

The value "copyright" is a predefined linktype in
HTML,
(http
://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#type-links)
and says that "Refers to a copyright statement for the
current document."
So I think using rel-copyright would perfectly fit in.

-- 
vant m. yak / vantguardegmail.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

Of course. I retract my last message. Orthogonal issues.

Regards, etc...

On 11/18/06, kota the vantguarde <vantguardegmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 11/18/06, Andy Mabbett <andypigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > I'm starting to look at using
rel="license". Am I right in thing that it
> > can be used to indicate that a page is NOT
available under a license, as
> > well as for those that are? For instance:
> >
> >        This page is <a rel="license"
> >        href="http://
www.example.com/copyright>copyright Example Ltd.
> >        2006</a> and may not be reproduced.
>
> If it's not published under a certain licence but
copyrighted (like in
> this case), you should use rel="copyright"
instead of rel-licence.
>
> The value "copyright" is a predefined
linktype in HTML,
> (http
://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#type-links)
> and says that "Refers to a copyright statement for
the current document."
> So I think using rel-copyright would perfectly fit in.
>
> --
> vant m. yak / vantguardegmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discussmicroformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss
>


-- 
David Janes
Founder, BlogMatrix
http://www.blogmatrix.com
http://www.onamine.com
http://blogmatrix.bl
ogmatrix.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

In message
<84ce626f0611180006q274c35a2y17aa10a30b43ca49mail.gmail.com>, Charles
Iliya Krempeaux <supercanadiangmail.com> writes

>> and why bother with a
>> "not-a-license" schema? There's far too
many negatives... as in
>> licenses that it wouldn't be....
>
>Andy might want to name one (or a few) specific licenses
that it is
>not.

No, thanks.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
                Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: 
<http://www.no2id.net/>

                Free Our Data:  <http://www.freeourd
ata.org.uk>
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss