- From: Mo McRoberts <Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk>
- Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 07:57:06 +0000
- To: Víctor Rodríguez Doncel <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es>
- CC: "<public-odrl@w3.org>" <public-odrl@w3.org>
Hi Víctor, I don't think there's much sense in updating the existing examples or crafting new ones until the initial tranche of issues on the vocabulary have been resolved, which is why I've not done it. M. On 26 Jul 2013, at 13:35, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es> wrote: > Yet, the point needing a more urgent clarification is the issue about the examples. > > With the former version we had only one "official" example -and not even this was evident (see http://www.w3.org/community/odrl/wiki/Examples_of_use, where an alternative with two examples was given...). > > Mo: shan't we jointly prepare more examples? Do you need me to prepare more under the same pattern? > Do you want to make a call, with whoever wants to participate? > > Regards, > Víctor > > > -------- Mensaje original -------- > Asunto: Re: Asset as superclass of Policy / Asset not superclass of Policy. Asset same as Thing. > Fecha: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:29:03 +0200 > De: Víctor Rodríguez Doncel <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es> > Para: public-odrl@w3.org > > > Well, the current spec text is very clear to me. > But about this decision, I must be missing something, because I see it very clear. Both Mo: > "Therefore, I propose maintaining the sameAs relationship between Asset and owl:Thing, and instead modify the spec to define Asset as any thing to which an ODRL policy might be applied (and leave it to the evolution of society, legal frameworks, and so on, to decide what that might be at any given time: if somebody asserts that an ODRL policy applies which is unenforceable because one can't legally or morally apply it, it's no different to an unenforceable policy for any other reason)." > and Koblenz-Landau have a similar idea: > "If Asset isn't the same as Thing, the possible uses-cases of ODRL are restricted" > If we make Asset the same as Thing, any class individual of any ontology on Earth becomes an Asset. > If we dont make Asset the same as Thing, we are not constraining absolutely any possibility (as long as we don't use "disjointAs")... Anything on Earth could be an Asset, if we declare it so, irrespective of the many other classes it can belong to. > ... > Víctor > > > > El 26/07/2013 13:59, Mo McRoberts escribió: >> The text currently reads: >> >> “The Asset entity is aimed at identifying the content that is the subject of an ODRL policy, e.g. a media file or ebook. Furthermore, it can be used to represent other Asset entities that are needed to undertake the Policy expression, such as with the Duty entity. The Asset entity is referred to by the Permission and/or Prohibition entities, and also by the Duty entity.” >> >> I would perhaps add a statement to the effect of... >> >> “Where a particular expression of an ODRL policy takes the form of a vocabulary used within a broader context, Asset should be aligned with a generic class in that context. For example, the RDF expression of ODRL considers Asset to be equivalent to owl:Thing.” >> >> Feel free to adjust the words to suit! >> >> M. >> >> On 2013-Jul-22, at 06:03, Renato Iannella >> <ri@semanticidentity.com> >> wrote: >> >> >>> On 16 Jul 2013, at 22:06, Mo McRoberts <mo.mcroberts@bbc.co.uk> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> As it wasn't, Asset exists in the ontology as a compatibility shim and little more. I really think the spec text is where the adjustment ought to be made. >>>> >>> ok, we can update the Model spec (as we have a draft version update [1])...what is the best description for the Asset? >>> >>> Cheers... >>> Renato Iannella >>> Semantic Identity >>> >>> http://semanticidentity.com >>> >>> Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206 >>> >>> [1] >>> http://www.w3.org/community/odrl/work/2-0-core-model-constraint-draft-changes/ >> -- >> Mo McRoberts - Analyst - BBC Archive Development, >> Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, 40 Pacific Quay, Glasgow G51 1DA, >> MC3 D6, 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. >> ----------------------------- >> >> > > > -- > Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel > D3205 - Ontology Engineering Group (OEG) > Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial > Facultad de Informática > Universidad Politécnica de Madrid > > Campus de Montegancedo s/n > Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, Spain > Tel. (+34) 91336 3672 > Skype: vroddon3 > > > > -- Mo McRoberts - Analyst - BBC Archive Development, Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, 40 Pacific Quay, Glasgow G51 1DA, MC3 D6, 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 Saturday, 27 July 2013 07:58:08 UTC