Re: ODRL Teleconference NOTES

Metaphorically :)

On Thu 2013-Apr-18, at 14:44, Cindy Lewis <cindy.lewis@me.com>
 wrote:

> Can abstract entities be swayed?
>
> C
>
> On Apr 18, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Mo McRoberts wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Thu 2013-Apr-18, at 13:44, Renato Iannella <ri@semanticidentity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 17 Apr 2013, at 01:33, Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ... and adding SKOS specific annotations:- making the ODRL vocab a SKOS vocab:
>>>> <http://w3.org/ns/odrl/vocab#> rdf:type skos:ConceptScheme;
>>>> - making the ODRL terms SKOS concepts:
>>>> e.g. <http://w3.org/ns/odrl/vocab#acceptTracking> rdf:type skos:Concept;
>>>> - making ODRL terms members of the ODRL vocab:
>>>> e.g. <http://w3.org/ns/odrl/vocab#acceptTracking> skos:inScheme
>>>> <http://w3.org/ns/odrl/vocab#>;
>>>
>>> Does not sound too hard to add these annotations...I have found one editor (TopBraid Composer) that supports SKOS easily....
>>
>> Hmm, a SKOS concept scheme and a vocabulary are not really equivalent terms unless you want to get so incredibly existential about it that we begin to question if we are all actually abstract entities represented in an n-dimensional space… so I'm not sure it's appropriate to define the vocab as being both a scheme and a vocabulary, with *some* of the things being concepts within that scheme (and defining everything in the vocab as being a concept would be clearly wrong).
>>
>> To my mind it'd make more sense to define :Action, :Scope, :UndefinedTerm and :ConflictTerm as distinct concept schemes with the individuals being concepts within those schemes.
>>
>> But, like everything, I'm willing to be swayed!
>>
>> M.
>>
>>>
>>>> Note: currently ODRL does not define something like an Action class.
>>>> (Therefore http://w3.org/ns/odrl/vocab#Action raises a 404)
>>>
>>> Actually there is...its just not live yet!
>>>
>>> See:  http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013/UNSTABLE/vocab.rdf#d4e791
>>>
>>> Cheers...
>>> Renato Iannella
>>> Semantic Identity
>>> http://semanticidentity.com
>>> Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Mo McRoberts - Technical Lead - The Space
>> 0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E,
>> Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, Pacific Quay, Glasgow, G51 1DA
>> Project Office: MC3 D4/5, Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TQ,
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mo McRoberts - Analyst - BBC Archive Development,
>> Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, 40 Pacific Quay, Glasgow G51 1DA,
>> MC3 D4, Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TQ,
>> 0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E
>>
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk
>> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
>> may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
>> If you have received it in
>> error, please delete it from your system.
>> Do not use, copy or disclose the
>> information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
>> immediately.
>> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
>> sent or received.
>> Further communication will signify your consent to
>> this.
>> -----------------------------
>>
>


--
Mo McRoberts - Analyst - BBC Archive Development,
Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, 40 Pacific Quay, Glasgow G51 1DA,
MC3 D4, Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TQ,
0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E



-----------------------------
http://www.bbc.co.uk
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and
may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in
error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the
information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender
immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails
sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to
this.
-----------------------------

Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 13:46:36 UTC