W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > September 2017

Re: ODRL rights & permissions

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 12:11:51 +0200
To: <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <29d7c22b-cb63-1bae-d0fd-43ad782b6eaa@few.vu.nl>
Hi Karen, all,

There should be a connection to ODRL indeed, especially if DCAT is going to handle fine-grained access rights. ODRL is quite formal, but it can also be relatively simple for simple needs, and it allows for some 'shortcuts' like [3] that will be more amenable simple uses and compatible with basic rights/access models like dc:rights (see motivations for [3] at [4]).

What would be really good is if our group could work on our access-related requirements before their CR period ends. We could flag it, if there's anything we'd have to need - or complain about. But I'm not sure we'll have the bandwidth (when is it due?).

By the way I had raised one ODRL-related issue on our github, not about DCAT but DQV [5]



[3] https://w3c.github.io/poe/model/#policy-has
[4] https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/184
[5] https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/5

On 15/09/17 16:50, Karen Coyle wrote:
> Two documents from the Rights and Permissions working group have reached
> candidate status:
>   * ODRL Information Model [1]
>   * ODRL Vocabulary & Expression [2]
> I've added these to the list of related W3C documents for our
> consideration. One possibility is that DCAT could hand off to an ODRL
> profile for the access rights. Admittedly, though, ODRL looks to be more
> formal than may be necessary for our purposes. Worth a discussion.
> [1] https://w3c.github.io/poe/model/
> [2] https://w3c.github.io/poe/vocab/
Received on Monday, 18 September 2017 10:12:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:41:57 UTC