[whatwg] HTML 5: Wording of "license" link type is too narrow
dmh at dmh.org.uk
Sat Feb 2 07:14:06 PST 2008
The scope of the "license" link type in section 4.12.3 seems too narrow
to me. It's presently described like this:
Indicates that the current document is covered by the copyright
license described by the referenced document.
I think the word "copyright" should be removed, allowing other types of
intellectual property licence to be specified as well. As a use case,
take for example a piece of documentation that is Apache-licensed:
<p>This piece of useful documentation may be used under the
terms of the <a rel="license"
Version 2.0</a>. Please note that Example™ is a trademark
of Example.com Enterprises.</p>
The license link not only refers to copyright law, but also trademark
law and patent law.
On a related note, should the "copyright" keyword really be a synonym
for "license"? They seem to have distinct purposes to me:
content="Copyright 2009-2010 Example.com Enterprises">
More information about the whatwg