RE: odrl-ISSUE-17: sameAs issue with Action vocabulary (forwarded)

From: "Michael Steidl \(IPTC\)" <mdirector@iptc.org>
Subject: RE: odrl-ISSUE-17: sameAs issue with Action vocabulary [ODRL 2 Ontology]
Date: 13 November 2013 18:59:31 AEST

Renato and all,

I can't see any good reason for having in a vocabulary a single authority (=
ODRL) two identifiers for the same concept.
We have to be careful not mixing up labels and identifiers, there are many
vocabularies which have many synonymous labels for the same concept but each
of them has only a single identifier. (Note: currently the ODRL vocabularies
have nothing like a label in the definition.)

Secondly if there is a strict need for having two identifiers for the same
concept we have to apply semantic inferencing:
For Actions:
If display owl:sameAs present
And if execute owl:sameAs present
Then display owl:sameAs execute

Currently display, execute and play have present as sameAs identifier,
therefore all these four identifiers identify the same concept. But at first
sight the Action table make people feel that display, execute and play are
different concepts.
I can only say: as rights expressions are already an area full of legal
tripwires we should not add semantic ones.

Michael