Following the round of last-call comments, I have published an update to the Feed license draft.
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-snell-atompub-feed-license-09.txt There are a number of important changes: * License links in feeds are now inherited by entries If an entry element does not contain a "license" link relation, then the "license" link relation of the containing feed or contained source element, if present, is considered to apply to the entry. This has been the most debated aspect of this draft and I know there are folks who will disagree with this decision. However, the majority of folks who took the time to comment on this favored an inheritance model similar to that used by the atom:rights element. * I've introduced an "unspecified license link". This is a special href attribute value that can be used to indicate that a license has not been explicitly associated with a feed or entry. This is particularly useful for republishers and aggregators who wish to indicate whether or not the entries they are republishing originally had license links, e.g., <feed> ... <link rel="license" href="http://example.org/license"; /> ... <entry> ... <link rel="license" href="http://purl.org/atompub/license#unspecified"; /> ... </entry> </feed> The presence of a unspecified license link does not mean that the entry doesn't have a license, just that the license has not been specified. * I've clarified that the license link is intended only to provide a potentially machine readable description of explicit rights that have been granted for a resource. I have requested that Lisa reissue the Last-Call on this. As always, additional comments and feedback are requested and welcomed. - James
