[Clipart] Website content

[Bryce Harrington]

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Ted Gould wrote:
> 
> > 1) File format.  At one point we had talked about doing both PNGs and
> > SVGs - but Chris brought up the good point that SVGs can do everything
> > PNGs can, plus they're vectored.  So what about having the entire
> > repository be SVG?  I have no problem with that.
> 
> SVG is fine, because we can always provide a script or some tool or
> instructions to convert to PNG.

I think what he meant is as an input format.  E.g., should raster images
like photos be included?

A collection of raster clipart would be useful but I wonder if it might
be better to focus on the vector clipart first.  There are already many
photo, pattern, etc. collections online, whereas availability of vector
clipart is much more limited so that's an area we can provide more of a
unique value.  

> We should start working on the metadata.
> 
> Name (maybe filename?)
> Description
> Keywords
> Date of contribution
> Original artist/contributor
> Original artist/contributor email (or contact information)
> Copyright/License information (if we don't require same for all)
> Image format?? with version (like some SVG software supports different
>  SVG features)

Perhaps also look at existing metadata formats such as Dublin Core.  It
would be sensible to tie in with schemes that other apps will already be
using. 

> > 3) Name.  The project needs an official name, I'm happy with
> > clipart.freedesktop.org, but I also like UnCAP (for Unified ClipArt
> > Project).  I think that we need to select that relatively quickly -
> > atleast before we start to market the repository.
> 
> clipart.freedesktop.org is fine for me.

Works for me too. 

> > 4) License.  I think everything should have to be public domain, is
> > there any issue with that?
> 
> Public domain works for me. If it is public domain, it must be documented:
> source and original date and original artist and agreement saying it is
> public domain.

I'm in agreement as well.

> I'd also like to include old artwork that is obviously public domain, but
> of course, it should be documented too.

It'd be great to have an archive of historical imagery but there's so
much of it - 3000 years worth.  :-)

Bryce