- From: Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>
- Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 10:25:23 +0200
- To: benedict.whittamsmith@thomsonreuters.com
- Cc: vrodriguez@fi.upm.es, public-poe-wg@w3.org
Hi! > How would you express this looser constraint in ODRL 2.1? I think it depends on being able to express/explicitly name "insubstantial parts of the contents of the database". simon --- DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna www: http://www.steyskal.info/ twitter: @simonsteys Am 2016-09-07 10:05, schrieb benedict.whittamsmith@thomsonreuters.com: > Hi Victor, > > How would you express this looser constraint in ODRL 2.1? If it’s > not possible surely it’s a candidate requirement? > > Ben > > FROM: Víctor Rodríguez Doncel [mailto:vrodriguez@fi.upm.es] > SENT: 07 September 2016 08:59 > TO: public-poe-wg@w3.org > SUBJECT: Re: One by one, but not in bulk > > Hi, > > The constraint does not need to be precise. This would be in line > with the European Database Directive, which reads... > > The repeated and systematic extraction and/or re-utilization of > insubstantial parts of the contents of the database [...] shall not be > permitted. > > This would be indirectly supported by UC2 on Data on the Web, > although it has not been made explicit nor will have direct impact in > the list of requirements. > > Regards, > Víctor > > El 07/09/2016 a las 9:49, benedict.whittamsmith@thomsonreuters.com > escribió: > >> Hmm, my own feeling is that the UCR should contain UCs that lead to >> requirements (giving us a clear criteria for inclusion) but we can >> pick from a wider set (and the mail archives will be a useful >> source) for the primer. >> >> Simon, Michael - what is your sense? >> >> Ben >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org] >> >> Sent: 07 September 2016 08:31 >> >> To: Renato Iannella; W3C POE WG >> >> Subject: Re: One by one, but not in bulk >> >> This is helpful, thank you. >> >> Should I still write the use case? IMO, where we have cases like >> this >> >> that ODRL can handle already, it's about explanation in the Primer, >> but >> >> how are we going to capture these now, if not in the UCR? >> >> Phil >> >> On 07/09/2016 08:22, Renato Iannella wrote: >> >> And if we add: >> >> odrl:prohibition >> >> odrl:action odrl:extract; >> >> We should then support Phil’s use case. >> >> Renato Iannella, Monegraph >> >> Co-Chair, W3C Permissions & Obligations Expression (POE) Working >> >> Group >> >> -- >> >> Phil Archer >> >> W3C Data Activity Lead >> >> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ [1] >> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http [2]- >> >> 3A__philarcher.org&d=CwIDaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- >> >> > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlz >> >> > nzDGH3wjzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=gNgdg5fNZlxzyr0FrPumBt3ggvTKea1yDdLggSux7UU& >> >> s=7MRHUGCCB7S2iCF5nwQMLHRfZ3dSgIZFRYXWik_xkqM&e= >> >> +44 (0)7887 767755 >> >> @philarcher1 > > -- > > Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel > > D3205 - Ontology Engineering Group (OEG) > > Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial > > ETS de Ingenieros Informáticos > > Universidad Politécnica de Madrid > > Campus de Montegancedo s/n > > Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, Spain > > Tel. (+34) 91336 3753 > > Skype: vroddon3 > > ------------------------- > > [3] > > El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico > en busca de virus. > www.avast.com [3] > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ > [2] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http > [3] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.avast.com_sig-2Demail-3Futm-5Fmedium-3Demail-26utm-5Fsource-3Dlink-26utm-5Fcampaign-3Dsig-2Demail-26utm-5Fcontent-3Demailclient&d=CwMDaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3wjzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=vrvMkOpQo1cOJIsDX4WDIEb-yLfC9IbYkre7WaNw2Y0&s=FIowelkP2OyHSAVEKbkgPcTlCt3J-21rSBxJSMQ4HsU&e=
Received on Wednesday, 7 September 2016 08:25:56 UTC