# [18:19] <@adactio> JonathanMalek: those documents you link to in the discussion are good examples of formats incorrectly (or at least prematurely) identifying themselves as microformats. Given the existence of those kinds of documents, confusion is understandable.
# [18:20] <@adactio> JonathanMalek: which is to say; I know you're acting in good faith—my inner pedant just wants to make sure that there isn't any further confusion of the term "microformat". :-)
# [18:23] <JonathanMalek> just more typing I suppose :)
# [18:24] <JonathanMalek> And the last thing I want to do is hang this up there--I've been pushing on this since last May, and I can see the light of day.
# [18:25] <JonathanMalek> After 3 weeks of vacation, I'm hoping to catch up on the discussion, so I've been reading furiously
# [18:26] <JonathanMalek> I have two questions, for any here who can answer: 1) item-license, where can I find more data?
# [18:29] <@adactio> item-license? Do you mean rel-license?
# [18:29] <JonathanMalek> and 2) reading through the logs of this chat, Tantek writes, "we're not going to repeat ccREL's mistakes." Is there information on that line of thought anywhere I can read?
# [18:30] <@adactio> So the issue is applying a rel value to a portion of a page rather than a whole document.
# [18:30] <tantekc> adactio - item-license is part of licensing-brainstorming to be able to denote a license on a specific portion of a web page or external resource (see http://microformats.org/wiki/licensing )
# [18:30] <@adactio> There has been some discussion of this.
# [18:31] <JonathanMalek> I saw in the logs of this IRC chat that Mark Ng refers to an "item-license", wondering if I had missed something.
# [18:32] <@adactio> It's worth noting that any solution for sub-document licensing would work well for other rel formats like tagging.
# [18:33] <JonathanMalek> I had assumed that rel-tag was already working that way, since hAtom uses it freely on a per-entry basis.
# [18:34] <singpolyma> JonathanMalek: The idea is that is tags apply to a post on a page, they apply to the page too. I don't that's every proven untrue in the wild
# [18:45] <tantekc> adactio - rel-tag already works for portions of documents
# [18:46] <tantekc> and we use it as such in hCard, hCalendar, hReview, hAtom etc.
# [18:46] <tantekc> there are interoperable implementations also, e.g. both Technorati and IceRocket index blog posts with rel-tag in them
# [18:46] <@adactio> tantekc: scoping by ID? or by containing compound microformats?
# [18:47] <tantekc> by containing compound microformats
# [18:48] <tantekc> and it works ok at the page level as well, because in essence if you all you do is find rel-tag on a page, all you can conclude is that *something* on the page has been tagged as such.
# [18:49] * Quits: ebel (n=rory@unaffiliated/ebel) (Remote closed the connection)
# [18:51] <@adactio> So the rel-license issue is potentially a solved problem as long as the licensed content is contained by a microformat such as hAtom (if we apply the same thinking to rel-license as to rel-tag).
# [18:57] <JonathanMalek> if it can be "contained", then yes, the problem goes away. I had been thinking of aggregators collecting several news stories on a single page, each with its own license.
# [18:59] <singpolyma> adactio: rel-license cannot be assumed to apply to the whole page, though, unlike rel-tag
# [18:59] <singpolyma> Assuming the wrong scope would be bad
# [19:00] <@adactio> singpolyma: the same could be said of tagging.
# [19:01] <@tantek> if a portion of a page is about some topic (tagged), then it is correct to say that the page is also about that topic, purely by containment.
# [19:01] <@adactio> If by applying rel-tag you are saying "something in this document is tagged with..." then by applying rel-license aren't you saying "something in this document is licensed with..."
# [19:02] <@tantek> but if a portion of a page is licensed as say CC-BY (like a quoted blog post), you cannot say that the whole page is licensed as CC-BY
# [19:02] <@tantek> adactio - the "something ... is" is part of the fundamental nature of how a tag works
# [19:03] <@tantek> even when you tag a blog post, you are not saying, the whole blog post is about this tag, you are saying, something in this blog post is about this tag
# [19:03] <@tantek> but a license applies to the entirety of whatever is being licensed.
# [19:05] <@adactio> I'd love to stay and chat but I'm off to the pub. ;-)
# [19:29] <@tantek> JonathanMalek - code is also rarely a good way to explain to web authors how a feature works.
# [19:30] <@tantek> It's likely we'll need to introduce a generic container class in a licensing microformat that can be used as the scope for the item-license
# [19:31] <@tantek> "item" is one such possible generic container class with the advantage that it is being re-used with the same semantic as in hReview (the item that the review is about), and it shares nomenclature with the rel="item-license" brainstorm as well thus more easily tying them together visually and conceptually.
# [19:44] <JonathanMalek> @tantek ok--makes sense. From the brainstorming page (http://microformats.org/wiki/licensing-brainstorming#rel_item_license), it seems like "license" contains "item". Is that still the current thinking? Asking because I'd like to change our proposal over to use this.
# [19:44] <@tantek> it is the current most evolved thinking on a licensing microformat yes.
# [19:45] <@tantek> if you are going to update your proposal, please be sure to reference the specific "item/item-license" brainstorm proposal - don't just copy it over into your proposal.
# [19:48] <JonathanMalek> understood. I would like to drop our ccREL effort, this seems to fit the bill.
# [19:49] <@tantek> if there are specific requirements that you have to "fit the bill" as you say, please check to see if the http://microformats.org/wiki/licensing#Usecases_hypothesis covers your requirements, and if not, perhaps add some.
# [19:50] <@tantek> that will help the development of a licensing microformat to reflect your expected requirements.
# [19:52] <@tantek> also I think it may be possible to simplify the proposal to only use the class name item - I'll write something up that reflects that possibility as well.
# [19:54] <JonathanMalek> Agreed--that should make it as easy as <div class="hentry item">...<a rel="item-license"...
# [19:56] <@tantek> it would allow mixing of such a licensing microformat with hAtom as you said, or any other compound microformat, including the existing uses of "item" like hReview and hListing.
# [19:58] <JonathanMalek> The hypotheses on the licensing page cover everything I had wanted to do. The simplicity is appealing.
# [20:26] <@tantek> people often misconstrue proposals as actual microformats, even brainstorm proposals on the microformats wiki. I'm sure you are familiar with this problem. :)
# [20:27] <JonathanMalek> sigh, yes. Haven't let it get me down yet though.
# [21:10] <JonathanMalek> @tantek I've finished a first set of changes, removing hRights from the proposal. I have some thinking to do about where "item" goes, if I don't want to duplicate any of the data. http://labs.ap.org/wiki/hNews.
# [21:12] <@tantek> "item" may just work as another class on the hentry, e.g. class="hentry item"
# [21:12] <@tantek> and yes - there is additional brainstorming needed to help prevent any data duplication in the case where multiple items want to share the same license etc.
# [21:13] <JonathanMalek> that's where I've put it for now
# [22:21] <@tantek> JonathanMalek - thanks for your comment on the 2006-10-05 photo - it took me a while to find it again, then I realized I had used poor link text "here" to link to it. I've updated the licensing page to hopefully make the origins more discoverable: http://microformats.org/wiki/licensing