I'm working these days on this module because I need it for my site. The work is not ended and I hope I can upload more code in the next weeks. The code is still beta / NOT well written!

If you have any suggestions, post them - THANKS. I'm not a professional module coder either an english native speaker...

What I have done:

  • I build a settings page, now you can select which version of the licenses should be used (e.g.: creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ ) and you can select a jurisdiction / language for the licenses-links (e.g.: creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/de/ )
  • Corrected / Add t()-strings - not ended!
  • Put some code from http://drupal.org/project/creativecommons, mainly the help text.
  • Edited the link in block, that the name of the license is shown as link.
    // creativecommons_lite.module, original line 153
$html .= l(t("This work's Creative Commons license"), $license_info['license_uri'], array('rel' => 'license', 'title' => $license_info['license_name'], 'target' => '_blank' ))."<br>\n";

    ->

    $html .= t("This work's Creative Commons license");
$html .= l($license_info['license_name'], $license_info['license_uri'], array('rel' => 'license', 'target' => '_blank' ))."<br />\n";
  • Commented out Developing Nations License, because this license is retired! Refer to http://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses
  • Last, but not least I've made a German translation.

I attached the diff against revision 1.2.

J-K

CommentFileSizeAuthor
#2 creativecommons_lite.module.2.patch21.17 KBJ-K@www.drupalcenter.de
creativecommons_lite-de.po8.98 KBJ-K@www.drupalcenter.de
creativecommons_lite.module.patch15.95 KBJ-K@www.drupalcenter.de

Comments

epe’s picture

epe commented

I will try to use the patch and will give you some feedback then.
I would also like some of the other feature requests being done.

In my point of view, a few of the current feature requests would be solved, if there is
- an additional option "All rights reserved"
- a modules config page for setting a default license per site and enabling/disabling specific licenses.
- optionally users should be able to select their personal default license.

I'm not sure, but it might be enough for the jurisdiction to be selected once per site, depending on where the site is run.

Thanks for working on this module! Danke!

J-K@www.drupalcenter.de’s picture

J-K@www.drupalcenter.de commented
StatusFileSize
new creativecommons_lite.module.2.patch21.17 KB

I’ve done more work! I also included the patch No License-Option modified a little bit (-> "No License Defined / All rights reserved").

@epe:
Could you code the possibility to “set a default license per site and enabling/disabling specific licenses”?
If not, I could experiment with this and try to make it, but my time is rare. (At the moment I disable licenses direct in the code...)

I attach a full patch, where my changes of the first patch here also included.

Changes:

  • Possibility to select between single icons that indicates a license and a license button. That’s why I renamed the images (e.g. icon-by.png) and converted all GIFs to PNG. And I inserted the license buttons and make small versions of them, too.
  • And you can decide, whether Drupal shows an info on none-CC-licensed nodes or not.
  • Furthermore I added a “small” version output - only license button with link - for external use. I use it to mark images. See http://drupal.org/node/214917 .
  • And more...

    • J-K

Forage’s picture

Forage commented

I knew I should have made a comment before I started working on this module yesterday. Now we are both making all sorts of changes ;-) I'm almost done with a Drupal 6 port of the module and I included most, if not all, changes from you're previous patch. I'll have a look at the new changes and create a new ticket as soon as I'm finished with the port. A few comments on your patch I'd like to share:

  • Try to leave out all commented out code in a patch. It's confusing and messy ;-)
  • You're mixing language and jurisdiction by using the language options to specify the jurisdiction. Only the jurisdiction is useful to include since that applies to the content. The language depends on the viewer and should therefore not be fixed. The viewer can click on a translation of the license himself when he's on the CC website.
  • You shouldn't default to the 'de' jurisdiction since it completely depends on the website which is going to use the module. If no jurisdiction is specified it should take the viewer to the general jurisdiction.
  • There's also a 2.5 version of some licenses.
  • 'No License Defined' is definitely not the same as 'All rights reserved' and can't be one and the same option for this reason.
  • It's 'Creative Commons' not 'CreativeCommons' nor 'Creativecommons' ;-)

I've fixed these issues in my version already and did a lot of code and UI cleaning. I've also included some other new features:

  • Default selected license setting
  • Mandatory licence specification checkbox setting
  • Improved the .install file by using hook_schema and drupal_install_schema() to support all db's and removal of all variables.

A few things which still need some consideration:

  • Not all licenses have a 3.0 version yet, or 2.5 for that matter. How should we handle this? I'm tempted to remove the version option again and use the latest (current) version for each license automatically. I don't really see a reason why anyone would want to use an older version.
  • Including a 'All rights reserved' option is tricky since this takes it out of the CC scope. If we start including this option, there can be loads of others which people want included. Personally I think we should limit it to only the CC options, CC or nothing at all.
  • I'm in doubt if I should leave my new options in the general settings or take them to the content type settings. By doing the latter you can specify this stuff for each content type. E.g. you might want to make CC specification for each story mandatory but not for a page. The drawback is more steps to perform to get the module up and running.
J-K@www.drupalcenter.de’s picture

J-K@www.drupalcenter.de commented

Hi Prodoc81,

thanks for working on this module and for all your tips and corrections! This is my first module I work on.

Not all licenses have a 3.0 version yet, or 2.5 for that matter. How should we handle this? I'm tempted to remove the version option again and use the latest (current) version for each license automatically. I don't really see a reason why anyone would want to use an older version.

I think, we have to add the possibility, that a user can take a setting in his personal settings so he can choose a version when selecting a license for a node. (And use user_access, that the admin can decide, who can choose a special version.)
If you don’t / can’t choose a special version, the latest version should be used.

This is important, when integrating other content, because then you can’t change the CC version of this work!

I (want to) use this module on a site for a magazine, which I publish, where the authors writing their articles on the site. -> I have user generated content and the user should choose a Creative Commons license.

Default selected license setting

Do you mean, the default license is selected when creating a node?
This is not a good idea respectively the admin should be able to deactivate this: When other user create content on the site, they should active choose a (Creative Commons) license. If their is no default and a user doesn’t choose a license, then the user get a error-message: Choose a license. So the user have to think about this. If there is a license already chosen, maybe some user doesn’t think about CC.

Including a 'All rights reserved' option is tricky since this takes it out of the CC scope. Personally I think we should limit it to only the CC options, CC or nothing at all.

I think, we should add a option “no Creative Commons license”. Because the license-choose-field is required and when an author doesn’t know about Creative Commons, he wants to upload his work now and doesn’t learn about Creative Commons. Maybe he choose a Creative Commons license before publishing, mainly when this is a need for publishing...
(OK, this could also be an argument for making the field not required and have only Creative Commons licenses... Don’t know, what the best strategy is to get most Creative Commons licensed works.)

J-K@www.drupalcenter.de’s picture

J-K@www.drupalcenter.de commented

ups, double posting...
sorry, I can’t delete this comment.

Forage’s picture

Forage commented

This is important, when integrating other content, because then you can’t change the CC version of this work!

Good point. In that case I think it's best to have a version dropdown on the node edit page where you also select the license which defaults to the lasted version for a new node. However, the problem of the different available versions of each licence remains. It's becoming a problem as soon as you select a jurisdiction. E.g. Finland only has version 1.0 for each license, the latest version for Japan is 2.1 (being the only jurisdiction with a version 2.1 I should add), etc.
At the moment I removed the version select completely and compiled a jurisdiction array with its latest version. When a jurisdiction is selected, that latest version of that jurisdiction is used, otherwise it uses version 3.0. I would hate to track down each previous version of each jurisdiction but this would be required in combination with JavaScript if you want to allow version selection.
It makes me wonder, should the jurisdiction selection not be per node as well? Having this only per site would basically be the same as version selection per site. When importing content you shouldn't be the one to change it to a different jurisdiction.

All this would come down to the following on the node edit page:

  • Licence dropdown
  • Jurisdiction dropwdown
  • Version dropdown which changes options as soon as a jurisdiction is selected

On the other hand, you could just keep it simple by letting the user figure it out. When you import existing content which has a CC licence you already know the version. You could add a check when you save the node which lowers the version to the latest of that jurisdiction if a higher version is selected.
If a lower non-existing version is selected you will have a dead link on the site's front-end. Is this an acceptable risk?

Do you mean, the default license is selected when creating a node?

Yes, that's what it does. If it's a one user site it saves you having to select it for each new node. If you want to force people to select a licence you leave this setting empty and check the 'Mandatory' checkbox. Thus no additional settings are required to get what you want.

I think, we should add a option “no Creative Commons license”

With the already implemented 'Mandatory' checkbox you can just select no licence from the dropdown at all and have the same effect. Nothing is selected so it doesn't have a CC licence.

Btw, today I also implemented a multiple select dropdown which allows the admin to select the licence options where the user can choose from.

J-K@www.drupalcenter.de’s picture

J-K@www.drupalcenter.de commented

With the already implemented 'Mandatory' checkbox you can just select no licence from the dropdown at all and have the same effect. Nothing is selected so it doesn't have a CC licence.

Ok, sounds good. (Previous I didn’t understand, what Do you mean with the “Mandatory licence specification checkbox setting”.)

Versions & jurisdictions:
Could we use the Creative Commons API?? -> http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Creative_Commons_Web_Services http://api.creativecommons.org/docs/

The module creativecommons use it, if I know.
This is related to the question: Is this module “light” version anymore?
Or should we work together?
Today I saw, that somebody is working on creativecommons module:
#157530: Update to Drupal 6

Forage’s picture

Forage commented

Could we use the Creative Commons API??

I had a look at it yesterday and as far as I can tell there's no way to retrieve version numbers using the API.

This is related to the question: Is this module “light” version anymore?
Or should we work together?
Today I saw, that somebody is working on creativecommons module:
#157530: Update to Drupal 6

I've been wondering this myself as well. To be honest, I didn't even bother to look at that module because I wanted to have a port for Drupal 6 and the light module had a version for 5 so it was a smaller step. Mind you, I just started using Drupal myself as well. As always, I saw room for improvement along the way so I kept on working on it. It seems to me that having two versions is a bit overkill but I don't know what the reason was for creating a light version so I'll have a look at the other module as well.
Before I continue to work on the module I'll create a new ticket and post my version. This way we don't have to keep doing duplicate work. It's usable already, even with the issues mentioned earlier. The only thing it lacks at this stage are the changed you made in the second patch.

A note about all this on the other modules ticket you mentioned wouldn't hurt either.

Forage’s picture

Forage commented

P.s. could someone please tell me how I can receive e-mail notifications about updated tickets? It's becoming a PITA to keep track of things and I must be overlooking the option somehow.

Forage’s picture

Forage commented

Heh, I see now why there's a normal and lite version. I think our changes still justify a lite version ;-)

By the way, here's the ticket about the changes I made: #223501: Drupal 6 support + additional features

cburschka’s picture

cburschka
they
commented

I agree that the lite version is a good thing. Thanks for alerting me to this, Prodoc - I'll see if I can come up with a feature scope for CC that will complement CC Lite rather than duplicate it. :)

skizzo’s picture

skizzo commented

@Prodoc81: Maybe you found your way already.
If not, click on issues (on this page right block)
then on subscribe (again, on right block).