[whatwg] Trying to work out the problems solved by RDFa

Calogero Alex Baldacchino alex.baldacchino at email.it
Thu Jan 8 19:01:34 PST 2009

Charles McCathieNevile ha scritto:
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 01:21:33 +1100, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen at iki.fi> 
> wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 2009, at 14:01, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
>>> On 2/1/09 10:38, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>>> Is the problem in the case of recipes that the provider of the page
>>>> navigation around the recipe is unwilling to license the navigation 
>>>> bits under the same license as the content proper?
>>> I thought Toby's example was that each recipe on the page needed a 
>>> different licence, rather than a distinction between the main 
>>> content area and the navigation.
>> Oh. That can be solved by giving each recipe its own URI & HTML page 
>> and scraping those pages instead of summary pages that might contain 
>> multiple recipes.
> Sure. In which case the problem becomes "doing mashups where data 
> needs to have different metadata associated is impossible", so the 
> requirement is "enable mashups to carry different metadata about bits 
> of the content that are from different sources.
> A use case for this:
> There are mapping organisations and data producers and people who take 
> photos, and each may place different policies. Being able to keep that 
> policy information helps people with further mashups avoiding 
> violating a policy.
> For example, if GreatMaps.com has a public domain policy on their 
> maps, CoolFotos.org has a policy that you can use data other than 
> images for non-commercial purposes, and Johan Ichikawa has a photo 
> there of my brother's café, which he has licensed as "must pay money", 
> then it would be reasonable for me to copy the map and put it in a 
> brochure for the café, but not to copy the data and photo from 
> CoolFotos. On the other hand, if I am producing a non-commercial guide 
> to cafés in Melbourne, I can add the map and the location of the cafe 
> photo, but not the photo itself.

It seems a scenario where a human should carefully evaluate each licence 
and perhaps put a careful and human readable prose into the mashed-up 
page, or a link to such a prose. Metadata may or may not be accurate 
(e.g. may be misplaced and not contain the whole license, or refer to a 
wrong kind of license, different from the one stated in the prose), but 
the whole prose (and perhaps only that) is legally binding for sure (I'm 
not aware of any international law recognizing metadata and/or 
machine-processable/machine-friendly extracted content as a valid legal 
agreement/notice - in your example, Johan Ichikawa might put the "must 
pay money" license in a span containing a metadata reference to a 
creative commons license, but only the "must pay money" license is 
surely valid as a legal notice, as far as I can tell).

> Another use case:
> My wife wants to publish her papers online. She includes an abstract 
> of each one in a page, but because they are under different copyright 
> rules, she needs to clarify what the rules are. A harvester such as 
> the Open Access project can actually collect and index some of them 
> with no problem, but may not be allowed to index others. Meanwhile, a 
> human finds it more useful to see the abstracts on a page than have to 
> guess from a bunch of titles whether to look at each abstract.

I'm not strongly for one solution or the other in this case (an actual 
choice may depend on several considerations, such as harvesters 
reputation, or the need to use metadata anyway for private purposes), 
but this case might be addressed by embedding each abstract in an 
iframe, so that human users would get all of them in a single page, 
while a harvester would need to navigate each page to index/copy it, and 
a proper metadata might be put into each page, or each page might have a 
different rule to restrict access (e.g. through a robot file, or the 
Access-Control semantics, or any kind of white- or black- lists), 
specially to prevent a malicious harvester (that is one deliberately 
ignoring metadata and licenses) from accessing certain contents.

WBR, Alex

 Caselle da 1GB, trasmetti allegati fino a 3GB e in piu' IMAP, POP3 e SMTP autenticato? GRATIS solo con Email.it http://www.email.it/f
 Email.it offre alle aziende il servizio di Email Marketing con pacchetti di invio a 10.000 utenti a soli 250 Euro
 Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=8352&d=9-1

More information about the whatwg mailing list