>From the example of @nicholascar, I understand that ODRL is capable of expressing advanced permission, prohibition, and obligation statements that stem from licenses or policies in general. I wonder whether there is also a formal semantics (some temporal deontic logic) that would enable reasoning and apply these rules to a given situation. Thinking of use cases / requirements, I think it would be important for many for publishers and users if the following information can be easily obtained from the metadata: - **license fee**: whether a license fee must be paid (perhaps not specifying the amount of that fee, which may also be dependent on the status of the user). - **attribution text**: whether attribution must be given and which text must be used when attributing. - **commercial use**: whether commercial use is allowed. - **share-alike**: whether derivative works must be shared under the same license conditions. - **reserved names**: whether there is a prohibition to use the name of the publisher/owner when communicating about derivative works (e.g. as an implied endorsement). As @aisaac pointed out, the [use cases and requirements](https://www.w3.org/TR/dcat-ucr/) document does not include new requirements for license properties / usage constraints / access constraints. Would it still be possible to propose a use case for this? -- GitHub Notification of comment by stijngoedertier Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/114#issuecomment-382675377 using your GitHub accountReceived on Thursday, 19 April 2018 09:43:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:28:22 UTC