Re: [dxwg] Allow license property to link to other than LicenseDocument

>From my reading of the discussion at [w3c/poe#184](https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/184), I understand that the conclusion was that, in general, `dct:license` cannot always be used to link to a `odrl:Policy` and that the more general approach is to use `odrl:hasPolicy`.

The reason is that `odrl:Policy` is [defined](https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-model/#infoModel) as "_a non-empty group of Permissions [...] and/or Prohibitions [...] and/or Duties[...]_" while `dct:LicenseDocument` is [defined ](http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-LicenseDocument) as "_a legal document giving official permission to do something with a Resource_". So a `dct:LicenseDocument` is only about permissions while an `odrl:Policy` can also contain prohibitions and duties/obligations. 
Therefore, the use of the property `dct:license` to link to an `odrl:Policy` is only valid if that `odrl:Policy` only contains permissions.

Based on this, my proposal is that we follow the conclusion that `odrl:hasPolicy` should be used if the object is an `odrl:Policy`.  

However, I would not extend that conclusion to the use of `dct:license` to link to Creative Commons licences. Even if Creative Commons licences are not only about permissions, they are widely used as the object of `dct:license`. For example,  [CC-BY-NC-ND](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) contains permissions (_You are free to_), prohibitions (_You may not_) and obligations (_You must_), which would not allow it to be used as the object of `dct:license`, according to the conclusion in the ODRL discussion.

I don't think it makes sense for DCAT to declare that practice invalid and say that everybody is doing it wrong. 

 


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by makxdekkers
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/114#issuecomment-370167386 using your GitHub account

Received on Saturday, 3 March 2018 18:04:07 UTC