Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update documentation about licences (CC-0 is also a valid licence choice) #32

Open
zed-g opened this issue Aug 1, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Comments

@zed-g
Copy link

zed-g commented Aug 1, 2023

Since we (at correspSearch) just got an inquiry about licence options, I would propose to update the relevant parts of https://github.com/TEI-Correspondence-SIG/CMIF/blob/main/doc/documentation-en.md#information-about-the-digital-index-of-letters to also include the licence option of CC-0. To my knowledge this is also an accepted licence choice for CMIF data and we already process and store CMIF data with this licence for correspSearch. It is also available as a licence option for our CMIF Creator.

I can provide the necessary changes to doc/documentation-en.xml (but I have no clue about your conversion-to-markdown routine).

@peterstadler
Copy link
Member

Makes sense to me to also allow everything looser (or equivalent) than CC-BY-4.0.

@rettinghaus
Copy link
Contributor

In general the documentation reflects what correspSearch needs, but not the customization (e.g., licence can be empty and its target attribute can point anywhere). It would be good if the documentation differentiated between the plain schema and application needs.

@zed-g
Copy link
Author

zed-g commented Aug 7, 2023

In general the documentation reflects what correspSearch needs, but not the customization (e.g., licence can be empty and its target attribute can point anywhere). It would be good if the documentation differentiated between the plain schema and application needs.

That's a good point, it's important to distinguish these two cases and be explicit about it. Either way, right now the documentation differs from the actual schema (and only mentions correspSearch once as far as I can see). If we leave the schema as is (with free choice of licences), we should at least strongly suggest/recommend CC-BY 4.0/ CC0/anything "looser" in the documentation I guess?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants