- From: Keith Alexander <k.j.w.alexander@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 13:03:43 +0100
- To: "Daniel O'Connor" <daniel.oconnor@gmail.com>
- Cc: valentina presutti <vpresutti@gmail.com>, public-lod@w3.org
Hi, Is an ontology a software project, a creative work, or data ? Is the intention to license the use of the terms, the triples of the ontology, or the reproduction of the documentation? There is also the dcterms:license property to point to a license. Maybe it is most useful if most ontologies have no restrictions to use, in which case waiving rights might be more appropriate than licensing them http://vocab.org/waiver/terms/.html Keith On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Daniel O'Connor <daniel.oconnor@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:53 PM, valentina presutti <vpresutti@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hi everybody, >> >> I could not find any suggestion of good practices for attaching a license >> to an ontology. >> Of course one can report it on its documentation (for humans), but I was >> wondering if there is any diffuse practice for embedding this info in the >> ontology as a property value (for machine readability). >> >> Any suggestion? >> > > Didn't creative commons provide a means to solve this a little bit; as well > as the DOAP method also mentioned? > http://wiki.creativecommons.org/License_RDF >
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2011 12:04:20 UTC