Re: Open Data Rights Statements

See also…

https://twitter.com/ldodds/status/351986011003289600

and

https://github.com/theodi/open-data-licensing/issues/7

:)

On 2 Jul 2013, at 11:38, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> This thread in the public-lod mailing list may be of interest for our community....
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2013Jul/0010.html
>
> Víctor
>
> -------- Mensaje original --------
> Asunto:       Re: Open Data Rights Statements
> Resent-Date:  Tue, 02 Jul 2013 10:34:11 +0000
> Resent-From:  public-lod@w3.org
> Fecha:        Tue, 2 Jul 2013 11:33:42 +0100
> De:   Leigh Dodds <leigh@ldodds.com>
> Para: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
> CC:   public-lod community <public-lod@w3.org>, public-vocabs@w3.org, public-egov-ig@w3.org
>
> Hi Andrea,
>
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Andrea Perego
>
> <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>  wrote:
> > That's very interesting, thank you, Leigh.
> >
> > I wonder whether you plan to consider work carried out in the framework of
> > the Open Data Rights Language (ODRL) CG of W3C [1].
>
> Yes, I'm aware of that work. ODRL is a general purpose rights
> expression language that can describe re-use policies. This is similar
> to the existing Creative Commons ccRel vocabulary which also captures
> the permissions, etc that are described by a licence.
>
> The ODRS vocabulary doesn't attempt to describe licenses themselves.
> It's intended more of a way to annotate the relationship between a
> dataset and one or more licences. Those licenses could be give a
> machine-readable description using ccREL or ODRL. So I think the
> vocabularies are compatible.
>
> I've already added an issue to cover describing this relationship a little more.
>
> > Also, do you plan to support the notion of "licence type"? This is being
> > used, e.g., in vocabularies like ADMS.SW [2] and the DCAT-AP (DCAT
> > Application Profile for EU data portals) [3].
>
> Looking at the DCAT profile it seems that license type is a category
> of license, e.g. public domain, royalties required, etc. To me, this
> overlaps with what ccRel and ODRL already cover, but at a more coarse
> grained level.
>
> I think for the purposes of the ODRS vocabulary we'll leave the
> description of licenses reasonably opaque and defer to other
> vocabularies to describe those in more detail. However we do
> distinguish between separate licenses that relate to the data and
> copyrightable aspects of the dataset.
>
> Cheers,
>
> L.
>
> --
> Leigh Dodds
> Freelance Technologist
> Open Data, Linked Data Geek
> t: @ldodds
> w: ldodds.com
> e:
> leigh@ldodds.com
>
>
>
>
>
>




--
Mo McRoberts - Analyst - BBC Archive Development,
Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, 40 Pacific Quay, Glasgow G51 1DA,
MC3 D4, Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TQ,
0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E



-----------------------------
http://www.bbc.co.uk
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in
error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the
information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to
this.
-----------------------------

Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 20:23:22 UTC