rights declaration

41 views
Skip to first unread message

Torsten Schaßan

unread,
Jul 6, 2026, 8:55:22 AMJul 6
to iiif-d...@googlegroups.com
Dear colleagues,

we publish our digital facsimiles of heritage materials in the Public Domain and attach the Public Domain Mark.

The IIIF validator throws an error for our rights declaration:


Isn't that an error in the schema, not to allow the Public Domain Mark but to require a CC license? Or does the rights field address the manifest itself and I would have to use another field for the rights declaration covering the digital images themselves?

Best regards,
Torsten | Schaßan

-- 
Torsten Schassan - Stellv. Leitung Referat "Handschriften und Sondersammlungen" / Arbeitsstelle Digitale Editionen
Herzog August Bibliothek, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.: +49 5331 808-130
Handschriftendatenbank: https://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss

Caitlin Perry

unread,
Jul 6, 2026, 9:55:22 AMJul 6
to iiif-d...@googlegroups.com
Hello Torsten, 

This is not an uncommon problem. I think in this case, the issue is likely the "https" in your URI. Try: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ instead.

More context is available here: https://github.com/IIIF/api/issues/1874.

If the issue persists, you may find more help in our Slack workspace

Best regards, 
Caitlin


--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the IIIF-Discuss Google group. To post to this group, send email to iiif-d...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to iiif-discuss...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/iiif-discuss?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "IIIF Discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to iiif-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iiif-discuss/32578453-5952%40mail.hab.de.

Andrew Hankinson

unread,
Jul 7, 2026, 9:12:47 AMJul 7
to iiif-d...@googlegroups.com
Did you try the http:// version of the URL? 

This was discussed recently on Slack, in the General channel. 


and also here: 


-Andrew

scha...@gmail.com

unread,
Jul 17, 2026, 11:37:35 AMJul 17
to IIIF Discuss
Dear Caitlin and Andrew,

you are so right, I didn't read the Guidelines well enough and http:// did the trick. At least the validator isn't complaining anymore. ;-)

Would it be an idea to adjust the error message of the validator to give users a better hint of what's going on and wrong?!

Thank you very much for your patience!

Best regards, Torsten

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages