[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook] Limited Legalnotice?
Hi, On 05/19/2012 10:04 PM, Thomas Schraitle wrote:
It seems we need to distinguish between the two use cases: 1. Express a license with the appropriate DocBook element. A license is usually subdivided into several portions.
Ok, yes, I understand, in your case it is a larger block than just an info and maybe multiple of them. I would still tend to also try to use simpler model for known license.
It would be nice to make an on-line repository, so that the author just can include it. <appendix> <title>License information</title> <para>The tool YYY is licensed under GPL 2.0</para><xi:include xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.docbook.xml" />
<para>The library ZZZ is licensed under GPL 3.0</para><xi:include xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.docbook.xml" />
</appendix> Marked up once by a team?, used many times. IF someone don't like the markup he can always patch it.
2. Add meta information about licenses for images, vides, audio, or text.
Maybe role="license:gpl-2.0" is better than adding a new tag. But tools and stylesheets need more work then? To parse role. That could also be used on any tag. <para role="license:CC-BY-SA">Wikipedia is a free, collaboratively edited and multilingual Internet encyclopedia supported by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation.
</para> Well, just a short quote might not need a license..
I would be interested to know how other people deal with this problem.I know, it looks very verbose in comparision to your model. :)
My thought was just that authors are not always XML (or license) experts, that is why I rather keep that syntax very easy to use.
Just because you want to add a small image in the document you do not want to learn rdf. (or mark up license text..) Sincerely, Fredrik Unger