- From: Rob Sanderson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 17:13:02 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
The first issue is "What does it mean to have a license associated with an Annotation and a different one associated with a Body". The intent is that the Annotation document and its semantics can be used according to the license associated with it. That could be more or less restrictive than any rights asserted over the Body, Target or other resource. Per the example in the model document, Ramona wants to be knows as the author of the Body content, and does not want that document to be used commercially, and hence asserts CC-BY-NC for the Body. However the annotation does not include the Body directly, nor can one infer any properties of the Annotation as relating to any given Body. The Annotation is the document that links the Body (or Bodies) to the Target (or Targets), and Ramona is happy for anyone to use this document in any way they want, hence asserts CC-0. Another scenario is where the creator of the Annotation is not the creator of the Body or Target. I could link a video on Youtube as the body to an image in Flickr as the target, without being the rights holder for either of those two resources. I can put my Annotation under CC-0 without affecting the rights of the video or image. Editorial action to consider how this might be clarified in the document. The second issue is whether some expression of the rights statement can be embedded within the Annotation. The intent of the working group is to not allow this, as it complicates the model and there isn't a good normative reference for what implementers should expect to encounter (that we know of). Instead, if there are (now or in the future) such expressions, they can be published at an IRI and that IRI referenced from the Annotation. If there is a compatible (e.g. RDF with JSON-LD expression) model available, a future version of the specification could refer to it directly. So the answer to the second part is no, it MUST be an IRI, per the specification. No action needed for this, beyond perhaps a little more text in the model document to clarify the intent. -- GitHub Notification of comment by azaroth42 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/360#issuecomment-250800396 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 30 September 2016 17:13:10 UTC