Dave Winer ☕️Why did the W3C, which is part of MIT, a supposedly respected academic institution, take my name off the RSS 2.0 spec? They should explain this, fix it, and probably apologize.
Andreas Kuckartz@davew The W3C is no longer part of MIT. See https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/9823
yes i heard that. i still think you have to respect creative commons attribution licenses. that was one of the first such licensed documents.
if you work at the w3c please ask them to just point to the spec. that's what would be weblike and respectful.
https://cyber.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html
scroll to the bottom to see authorship credits and the cc license.
@davew I do not work at the W3C.
Maybe @koalie can help.
BTW: A relaunch of the website is scheduled for tomorrow:
https://status.w3.org/incidents/t7dg7v8kjh20
Coralie Mercier (W3C)@andreas_kuckartz thanks for drawing my attention to this.
Hi @davew it looks like the license is respected and that the documents this particular document draws from do not credit individuals either. I'm happy to help fix any error but I'm not finding where the error(s) is/are.
Hi @davew it looks like the license is respected and that the documents this particular document draws from do not credit individuals either. I'm happy to help fix any error but I'm not finding where the error(s) is/are.
It’s pretty simple, outlined here with screenshots and links.
@davew have you reached out to https://www.rssboard.org/ too? The docs referred to in https://validator.w3.org/feed/docs/rss2.html#aboutThisDocument are hosted there.
Any news regarding this issue ?
It’s on my blog.
In case anyone is interested, an issue was created:
Copyright concerns on from RSS 2.0 Specification page
https://github.com/w3c/feedvalidator/issues/106
