Re: rdflicense

Dear all,

A first version of a RDF dataset of licenses (for software, data, etc.), 
and written in ODRL, has been recently published as Linked Data.
You can explore it here:

http://datahub.io/dataset/rdflicense 
<http://datahub.io/es/dataset/rdflicense>

This is the result of a joint effort between UPM and INRIA.
We are aware that some changes are needed. In particular, we are 
concerned about the following problems:
a) ODRL actions have been replaced in the latest update by 
CreativeCommons terms. But the former were class instances (e.g. 
odrl:distribute) and the latter are OWL classes (e.g. cc:Distribution). 
How should we proceed?
b) A license should be a odrl:Set, certainly. Yet, for a newcomer is 
hard to understand this polysemic word, and I prefer odrl:Policy even if 
less specific: everybody catches the meaning at a glimpse.

Regarding the Java ODRLAPI (http://vroddon.github.io/odrlapi/), I inform 
that it was yesterday presented in Leipzig (in a small workshop within 
the Semantics conference) and we got valuable feedback too. But you can 
comment it too!

We believe these two actions are important steps towards the adoption of 
ODRL to express rights and/or policies for Linked Data.

Regards,
Víctor