Licenses in Operating Systems Specification
- 1 Licenses
- 2 Operating Systems
- 3 Filetype Mapping
- 4 Preferences
All licenses should be allowed into this structure. T
- What licenses should be allowed?
- Should licenses be weighted?
- How will they connect with mime-types and how will a system know which filetypes connect with which licenses?
What is the best way to name licenses for inclusion.
Possibly this form:
Then, for the three file types, this possibly would make sense:
cc-attribution-machine-2.5.rdf cc-attribution-human-2.5.txt cc-attribution-lawyer-2.5.txt
This way also, a system could have other versions of licenses, such as:
cc-attribution-machine-2.5.rdf cc-attribution-machine-2.5.xml cc-attribution-human-2.5.txt cc-attribution-human-2.5.html cc-attribution-human-2.5.odt cc-attribution-lawyer-2.5.txt cc-attribution-lawyer-2.5.html cc-attribution-lawyer-2.5.rtf
This would be the human readable commons deed that is included with a license.
This would be the legalese for lawyers and courts to read that is specific and really the highest level (most abstract) version of a license.
This is the digital version of a license that is to be read by software (machines).
Please help us fill this out :)
Mac OS X
C:\%APPDATA%\create (for local use)
There should be a simple mechanism for mapping known filetypes to types of licenses that can be used with a type of content. There should also be some mechanism for recognizing preferences and possible violations of licenses.
- How does this fit in with mimetypes?
- How can these preferences be dealt with?
- Is dealing with possible violation too DRM-like?
This is a section TBD on how to deal with preferred licenses and also licenses whose filetype/mime-type mapping is not known.