RE: Namespace of ODRL

> I'd agree - though I should note that if ODRL-as-RDF is in any way successful, the JSON-LD encoding will probably come into existence as a matter of course :)

You're right - and I think we all want to see ODRL-as-RDF succeed! I suppose one interesting consequence is that RDF itself has a number of standard syntax expressions (such as in XML and JSON) and that we are also defining an expression of the ODRL data model in some of those same syntaxes (XML and JSON). In other words, we're not really trying to make ODRL-expressed-in-XML exactly the same as XML-generated-from-ODRL-expressed-in-RDF, are we? I think that we are attempting to create expressions of ODRL in each syntax in the most "natural" way, to fully take advantage of the benefits (and avoid the drawbacks) of each syntax and technology.

Regards,

Stuart


-----Original Message-----
From: Mo McRoberts [mailto:Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk] 
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 8:21 AM
To: Myles, Stuart
Cc: Renato Iannella; public-odrl@w3.org Group
Subject: Re: Namespace of ODRL


On  2013-Jul-22, at 13:07, "Myles, Stuart" <SMyles@ap.org> wrote:

>> Okay, I've done the necessary initial steps:
> 
> Sadly, when I clicked on those links, I just got "LODE error. Reason: ptah.bencrannich.net". However, the overall approach makes sense to me.

Odd -- it works okay for me, unless the links got wrapped or broken by mail... try them on here instead?

http://www.w3.org/community/odrl/wiki/SemanticWeb

> 
>>> And....to be clear, it means we have to update the XML Encoding spec to use the new namepace URIs.
> 
> That's a good point. Do we need to do something formal, since the XML Encoding has already been agreed, right?
> 
>> This shouldn't make the JSON-LD especially complex, it just means that the actions/functions/constraints/policies/scopes will always be prefixed with a namespace when used within an ODRL JSON document (because the default namespace would be the model).

> 
> The idea of using parts of JSON-LD for the ODRL in JSON representation has been floated. I'm not so certain that we've committed to that. I'm certainly in favour of using aspects of JSON-LD to the extent that it makes things easier to implement (but obviously opposed to the extent that it is a barrier to implementation). I think it would be helpful to look at some examples, to make it easier to understand the consequences.

I'd agree - though I should note that if ODRL-as-RDF is in any way successful, the JSON-LD encoding will probably come into existence as a matter of course :)

(That's not much of an argument weighing anything in either direction, though, really)

General alignment even if ODRL-JSON isn't formally derived from JSON-LD would probably be a good thing, though.

M.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Stuart
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mo McRoberts [mailto:Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk]
> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 6:19 AM
> To: Mo McRoberts
> Cc: Renato Iannella; public-odrl@w3.org Group
> Subject: Re: Namespace of ODRL
> 
> And for those who prefer human-readable documents...
> 
> http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013
> /UNSTABLE/model 
> http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013
> /UNSTABLE/actions 
> http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013
> /UNSTABLE/constraints 
> http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013
> /UNSTABLE/functions 
> http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013
> /UNSTABLE/policies 
> http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/owlapi/http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013
> /UNSTABLE/scopes
> 
> M.
> 
> On  2013-Jul-22, at 10:18, Mo McRoberts <Mo.McRoberts@bbc.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> Okay, I've done the necessary initial steps:
>> 
>> http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013/UNSTABLE/model.ttl
>> 
>> http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013/UNSTABLE/actions.ttl
>> 
>> http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013/UNSTABLE/functions.ttl
>> 
>> http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013/UNSTABLE/constraints.ttl
>> 
>> http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013/UNSTABLE/policies.ttl
>> 
>> http://ptah.bencrannich.net/2013/UNSTABLE/scopes.ttl
>> 
>> This shouldn't make the JSON-LD especially complex, it just means that the actions/functions/constraints/policies/scopes will always be prefixed with a namespace when used within an ODRL JSON document (because the default namespace would be the model).

>> 
>> M.
>> 
>> On  2013-Jul-22, at 07:09, Renato Iannella <ri@semanticidentity.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On 19 Jul 2013, at 18:37, Mo McRoberts <mo.mcroberts@bbc.co.uk> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Okay, it seems like we're close to (if not have) consensus on this one - does anybody have any objections before I make the changes?
>>> 
>>> No objections....just want to see if this namespace change is OK for 
>>> the ODRL JSON spec? (Jonas?)
>>> 
>>> And....to be clear, it means we have to update the XML Encoding spec to use the new namepace URIs.
>>> 
>>> (I am ok to use SKOS as well...)
>>> 
>>> 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 D6, Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TQ,
>> 0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E
>> 
> 
> --
> 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 D6, 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.
> -----------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> The information contained in this communication is intended for the 
> use of the designated recipients named above. If the reader of this 
> communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
> that you have received this communication in error, and that any 
> review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication 
> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in 
> error, please notify The Associated Press immediately by telephone at 
> +1-212-621-1898 and delete this email. Thank you.
> [IP_US_DISC]
> 
> msk dccc60c6d2c3a6438f0cf467d9a4938
> 


--
Mo McRoberts - Analyst - BBC Archive Development, Zone 1.08, BBC Scotland, 40 Pacific Quay, Glasgow G51 1DA,
MC3 D6, Media Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TQ,
0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E

Received on Monday, 22 July 2013 13:15:02 UTC