- From: Víctor Rodríguez Doncel <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es>
- Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 23:37:26 +0200
- To: public-odrl@w3.org
I totally agree with this view. I think these terms should have been part of the common vocabulary, but now a new final specification has just been published. I love ODRL and the ODRL core model, but I believe the vocabulary foundation is ill-defined and the criteria for including a term or not is unclear. The purpose of the vocab is defined to be with a laconic "for policy expression needs", and the referred requirements list is only found in a 2004 document (http://www.w3.org/2012/09/odrl/archive/odrl.net/2.0/v2req.html), which might still be valid. The bad news is that the current terms in the vocabulary are not related at all with those requirements. For example, req. 7.9 claims that a term for "streaming" is needed, but such a term does not appear in the current specification. Reversely, a "textToSpeech" exists but not justified why. . I guess it is too late to re-structure the terms/requirements. Regards, Victor El 14/04/2015 15:43, Renato Iannella escribió: >> On 14 Apr 2015, at 12:02 am, Mo McRoberts <mo.mcroberts@bbc.co.uk> wrote: >> >> Okay - humour me — I know I’ve danced around this a few times… but… who *is* defining it? > Looking at the BBC’s terms: http://www.bbc.co.uk/terms/ > They make a clear distinction between “personal” and “business” use (purposes). > > You can then delve into the details of each license..but the point is that there are common concepts about what “personal” and “business” use mean - and there is no way that if we defined “personal” that it would match the intricacies of the BBC Personal Use license. > Just like ccRELs definition of: "cc:CommercialUse - using the Work for commercial purposes” would not come close to the BBC Business Use license. > > But the point of these languages was never to replace the verbatim wording of such licenses/policies. > > So imagine we had “personal”, “business” and “educational” purpose usages - how are they defined precisely? Does it really matter? > > If we defined “personal” as “for personal use” wouldn’t that be enough? > > Microsoft sells “Office for Home”, “Office for Business”, and “Office for Students” - and there is no need to read the T&Cs to determine which one you should buy. > > Cheers... > Renato Iannella > Semantic Identity > http://semanticidentity.com > Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206 > > -- Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel D3205 - Ontology Engineering Group (OEG) Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial ETS de Ingenieros Informáticos Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Campus de Montegancedo s/n Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, Spain Tel. (+34) 91336 3753 Skype: vroddon3
Received on Tuesday, 14 April 2015 21:35:44 UTC