RE: ODRL Version 2.1 Final Draft Specifications – Last Call for Comments (due 16 FEB) [via ODRL Community Group]

Hi Steven,

> What is going to be required to be able to write the JSON-LD code in such a way that it contains ODRL terms that can be part of a search engine's reading of the JSON-LD?

Well, at a really high level, I suppose two things:

1. You need to generate JSON-LD from the ontology for the ODRL statements you wish to make. (This is the bit that Mo agreed could be done, although it is mainly a question of finding the time to implement it).
2. The search engines would need to implement something that reads the ODRL statements out of the HTML (and evaluates them?).

Point 2 might be a bit beyond the scope of the ODRL effort. I did do some work a couple of years ago with the schema.org people to have them adopt the rNews model (http://dev.iptc.org/rNews-1-Schemaorg-compatible-Implementation-Guide-HTML-5-Microdata). In particular, just because someone is expressing something in an HTML page - whether using RDFa, microformats or JSON-LD - is not a guarantee that search engines will look for it or handle it.

Regards,

Stuart


-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Rowat [mailto:steven_rowat@sunshine.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:43 AM
To: public-odrl@w3.org
Cc: public-odrl@w3.org
Subject: Re: ODRL Version 2.1 Final Draft Specifications – Last Call for Comments (due 16 FEB) [via ODRL Community Group]

On 1/19/15 9:03 AM, Mo McRoberts wrote:
> I’m open to the idea of trying to come up with a workflow which adds 
> JSON-LD generation to the existing tooling (which generates RDF/XML 
> and N-Triples serialisations of the ontology and examples from the 
> source Turtle), although the biggest constraint is, as ever, time.
>
> M.

Hi Mo,

Thank you for your explanation; unfortunately I'm out of my depth in attempting to understand all parts of it. I could research each of the individual components and terms that you've used, but, as you mention, there is the question of time -- my own projects are time-consuming and largely tangential or orthogonal to this question. So perhaps I'm doomed to not understand how JSON-LD and ODRL can work together (or
can't) until some future implementation occurs that makes this clear.

Or, perhaps it's still possible to clarify (for myself) the potential cross-over point of JSON-LD and ODRL, without learning other languages; maybe with an example?

So I'll try this:...

      1. Suppose I have a an HTML page, on which is listed a digital
work: 'Book A'.

      2. Suppose that I have inserted, into the HTML page, a JSON-LD implementation of schema.org terms  to describe that HTML page, including Book A's title, author, size and type of file, etc.

      3. Suppose I also want ODRL terms to be available from the page, concerning Book A -- various rights and permissions.

      4. Suppose I want these ODRL terms to be searchable logically, by machine, via the search engines, as part of JSON-LD (ie, as linked data).

Then:
What is going to be required to be able to write the JSON-LD code in such a way that it contains ODRL terms that can be part of a search engine's reading of the JSON-LD?

My apologies, Mo, if the answer to this question is contained in what you already said. If so, then I suppose my only option is to read more about ontologies, serializations, RDF, XML, N-triples, tooling, and Turtle. :-)

Steven Rowat








>
> On  2015-Jan-19, at 16:52, Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/19/15 3:32 AM, W3C Community Development Team wrote:
>>> The W3C ODRL Community Group seeks feedback from the community on 
>>> the Version 2.1 Final Draft specifications of the ODRL Policy 
>>> Language:
>>
>>> ODRL Version 2.1 JSON Encoding
>>
>> Short form: Is JSON-LD also supported? (It's not mentioned on that 
>> page ODRL 2.1 JSON Encoding page.)
>>
>> Background: Google and other search engines read JSON-LD, and it's 
>> listed at schema.org alongside Microdata and RDF as a tagging system 
>> for the general web. When I looked at the example for tagging a 
>> 'Book' at schema.org, JSON-LD seemed to me to have several advantages 
>> over Microdata and RDFa. Plus, the Credentials Community group and 
>> the Web Payments Community group are basing at least some of their 
>> work on JSON-LD.
>>
>> Google says here:
>> https://developers.google.com/webmasters/structured-data/schema-org

>>
>>
>>
"JSON-LD is the newest and simplest markup format: it lets you embed a block of JSON data inside a script tag anywhere in the HTML. Since the data does not have to be interleaved with the user-visible text, it's much easier to express nested data items [snip]...Google is in the process of adding JSON-LD support to more markup-powered features."
>>
>> Specifically in the ODRL context, my (non-expert) belief is that 
>> JSON-LD is merely an extension of JSON, and so in theory one might be 
>> able to use the ODRL JSON Encoding directly with JSON-LD. Is this 
>> true?
>>
>> If so, it might be nice to make a mention of JSON-LD on the ODRL JSON 
>> page, or even give an example,.
>>
>> If not -- and some different ODRL Encoding needs to be done to get 
>> ODRL to work with JSON-LD -- is there something in the works for 
>> this?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Steven Rowat
>>
>
>



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

Received on Tuesday, 20 January 2015 17:27:32 UTC