W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org > April 2012

Re: [all] suggestions for consolidating requirements

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:04:18 +0200
Message-ID: <CAL58czo8h9+nMZMamg5yyCJjikcVd+-O-4xqw3o8L4i=Q=7cYQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@gmail.com>
Cc: Des Oates <doates@adobe.com>, David Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>, "public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
(not fully back yet, but throwing one aspect in here)

In general, it might make sense to trigger these discussions and other
discussions of data categories by applications that will be developed this
or next year. In the next weeks we need to start consolidating data
categories asking ourselves
1) Who will implement this?
2) What tooling, usage scenario, users are behind this?
3) What test cases will be behind this
I assume that answers to these questions will help a lot to resolve issues
coming up in the "top down" data category discussion in this and other
threads.

Best,

Felix

Am 26. April 2012 16:07 schrieb Arle Lommel <arle.lommel@gmail.com>:

> Hi all,
>
> Desí understanding reflects my own when I put these in. I see these are
> pretty distinct, because confidentiality is not about licensing, but about
> whether you can expose the content publicly in a process. You might have a
> case where you have content that will be GPLed (licensingTerms) but not
> want it exposed publicly yet (confidentiality). The first would tend to be
> in published materials (i.e., you've put something on the web and you are
> telling a tool, potentially one you don't even know is looking at your
> content, whether it can scrape it and use it; the second would be process
> metadata telling you how to act in your process. I think they are
> distinction enough (and operate in different areas) that it makes sense to
> separate them.
>
> -Arle
>
>
>
> Sic scripsit Des Oates in Apr 26, 2012 ad 05:59 :
>
> Dave, re this case below, Iím not sure if this is a full overlap.  The use
> case mentioned in the contentLicensingTerms section covers  MT Training
> corpora.   Confidentiality is more applicable to a Translation Workflow use
> case, where the decision logic is more likely to be implemented in a TMS.
>   If both cases are covered by this data category, then it would be OK, but
> I want to confirm this is the case first.****
>
> Thanks****
>
> Des****
>
> ** **
>
> Moritz, Des: I think there is potential to combine 'confidentiality' with
> 'contentLicensingTerms', with confidentiality being a specific value of
> contentLicensingTerms, whcih could perhaps be relaised using Creative
> Commons license classes****
>
>
>
> ****
>
>
>


-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Friday, 27 April 2012 08:04:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 9 June 2013 00:24:55 UTC