RE: Comment on Action vocabulary

I cannot help but be reminded of an interesting presentation I saw at Balisage 2009:

“Documents Cannot Be Edited”
http://www.balisage.net/Proceedings/vol3/html/Renear01/BalisageVol3-Renear01.html


It starts out: “Editing is a familiar practice to almost everyone, and revision a fundamental feature of publishing workflows. Yet document modification would appear to be an illusion.”

Also perhaps relevant here is the so-called FRBR model, which models a work, expression, manifestation and an item:

http://www.loc.gov/cds/downloads/FRBR.PDF


In other words, when it comes to *digital* assets, is it really possible to say that when making a “change” to an asset that no new asset is created? After all, if the bits change, then the changed asset is no longer the original, isn’t it?

Regards,

Stuart



From: Michael Steidl (IPTC) [mailto:mdirector@iptc.org]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 9:54 AM
To: 'ODRL Community Group'
Subject: RE: Comment on Action vocabulary

Good question.
I think the key difference is: is something new created by changing the data – having an “old” copy and a “new” copy of the asset – or stays the asset as a whole the same – only one copy exists – but the data of this asset has been modified.

By my interpretation of the current definitions:

-          modify and addTo does not create a new copy only the data of the one and only asset are changed

-          derive, reproduce and extract create a new (copy of the) asset.

I agree some minor word-smithing may be required to make this crystal clear.

derive: The Assigner permits/prohibits the Assignee(s) to create a new derivative Asset from this Asset and to edit the derivative.

extract: The Assigner permits/prohibits the Assignee(s) to extract parts of the Asset and to use it as a new Asset.

reproduce [unchanged!]: The Assigner permits/prohibits the Assignee(s) to make (an) exact reproduction(s) of the Asset.

Reading that raises this issue: what is the difference between derive and extract?
Many might interpret a derivative is a look-a-like, something that still has key features of the original asset; while extracted data might not allow to trace back the original.
If this is shared by others we should try to pin this down in the definition. Our goal must be to have definitions an unambiguous as possible.

Michael

From: Renato Iannella [mailto:ri@semanticidentity.com]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 1:28 PM
To: ODRL Community Group
Subject: Re: Comment on Action vocabulary


On 24 Oct 2014, at 18:45, Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org<mailto:mdirector@iptc.org>> wrote:

My favourite design is:
* modify or update: The Assigner permits/prohibits the Assignee(s) to modify/update existing data of the Asset
    * addTo: The Assigner permits/prohibits the Assignee(s) to add data to the Asset

I would support the change.

However, I think then we need to clarify “modify” and “derive”, as with both actions, a new asset is created?

Cheers...
Renato Iannella
Semantic Identity
http://semanticidentity.com

Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206



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