- From: Leigh Dodds <leigh@ldodds.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 11:33:42 +0100
- To: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
- Cc: public-lod community <public-lod@w3.org>, public-vocabs@w3.org, public-egov-ig@w3.org
Hi Andrea, On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu> wrote: > That's very interesting, thank you, Leigh. > > I wonder whether you plan to consider work carried out in the framework of > the Open Data Rights Language (ODRL) CG of W3C [1]. Yes, I'm aware of that work. ODRL is a general purpose rights expression language that can describe re-use policies. This is similar to the existing Creative Commons ccRel vocabulary which also captures the permissions, etc that are described by a licence. The ODRS vocabulary doesn't attempt to describe licenses themselves. It's intended more of a way to annotate the relationship between a dataset and one or more licences. Those licenses could be give a machine-readable description using ccREL or ODRL. So I think the vocabularies are compatible. I've already added an issue to cover describing this relationship a little more. > Also, do you plan to support the notion of "licence type"? This is being > used, e.g., in vocabularies like ADMS.SW [2] and the DCAT-AP (DCAT > Application Profile for EU data portals) [3]. Looking at the DCAT profile it seems that license type is a category of license, e.g. public domain, royalties required, etc. To me, this overlaps with what ccRel and ODRL already cover, but at a more coarse grained level. I think for the purposes of the ODRS vocabulary we'll leave the description of licenses reasonably opaque and defer to other vocabularies to describe those in more detail. However we do distinguish between separate licenses that relate to the data and copyrightable aspects of the dataset. Cheers, L. -- Leigh Dodds Freelance Technologist Open Data, Linked Data Geek t: @ldodds w: ldodds.com e: leigh@ldodds.com
Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 10:34:10 UTC