RE: AW: Ontology license info

Hi Alan,

 

The most recent releases of OMV can be found at http://omv.ontoware.org.  If you navigate to the download section of the core (http://sourceforge.net/projects/omv2/files/OMV%20Core%20Ontology/) you will see v2.4.1 is the latest release (http://sourceforge.net/projects/omv2/files/OMV%20Core%20Ontology/OMV_v2.4.1.owl/download ).

Wrt to you second comment, you are right we defined the properties in the OMV namespace but we do not have a cc property. We have a hasLicense objectProperty. The range of this objectProperty is the LicenseModel class. We used this range instead of e.g., any URI, following the original design decision to model classes of relevant concepts related to the ontologies in a similar manner.  There are already declared some pre-defined individuals of the LicenseModel class, e.g., CPL, GPL, etc. However, after checking, I found that the CC License individual is missing from the list of pre-defined values, so it has to be declared as with the other ones. For each license model individual you can specify a name, acronym, description and documentation (and the party who specified it). E.g., 

 

Individual-CC_Attribution

 

Name: Creative Commons Attribution

Acronym: CC BY

Description:  This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation.

Documentation: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ 

 

Best,

Raul

 

 

From: Alan Ruttenberg [mailto:alanruttenberg@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, 26 July, 2011 11:42 PM
To: Raul Palma
Cc: public-lod@w3.org
Subject: Re: AW: Ontology license info

 

Hi Raul,

 

1) Could you send me a link to the current ontology - the one I found doesn't have the reference to CC.

2) I'm guessing that the cc properties are defined (as with the rest) in the http://omv.ontoware.org/2005/05/ontology namespace. This would mean that there would be an integration problem if someone cited a CC license - http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

 

What not use the published IRIs?

 

0Alan

 

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Raul Palma <rpalma@man.poznan.pl> wrote:

Hi all,

To complement what Mari Carmen said, in OMV there is class LicenseModel that it is used to specify the license of a particular Ontology (via the hasLicense objectProperty).

OMV definition:

Name: hasLicense

Type: ObjectProperty

Occurrence Constraint: optional

Category: Availability information

Definition: Underlying license model

Domain: omv:Ontology

Range: omv:LicenseModel

Cardinality: 0:1

OMV version: 0.1

Comments: Reference to a concrete LicenseModel Pre-defined values. 

 

Individuals of the class LicenseModel refer to well-known license models, such as:

• Academic Free License (AFL)

• Common Public License (CPL)

• Lesser General Public License (LGPL)

• Open Software License (OSL)

• General Public License (GPL)

• Modified BSD License (mBSD)

• IBM Public License (IBM PL)

• Apple Public Source License (APSL)

• INTEL Open Source License (INTEL OSL)

• Mozilla Public License (MPL)

• Creative Commons Licenses (CCL)

– Attribution (by)

– Attribution-NoDerivs (by-nd)

– Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (by-nc-nd)

– Attribution-NonCommercial (by-nc)

– Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike (by-nc-sa)

– Attribution-ShareAlike (by-sa)

The class can be extended to support additional classifications. 

The OMV project is running. The latest release of the core has been stable for some time now.  However, if new requirements are derived from users feedback/requests, a new version of the core may evolve.  More recently, efforts have been in the definition of extensions.

 

Best,

Raul

 

  _____  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3789 - Release Date: 07/26/11