Re: using duty in odrl:Set (without sorrounding permission)

Hi!

> Yes, that breaks the model, as it does not directly link the
> obligation of the Duty on performing the Permission actions.
> See the "Offer" example here as a way to express this:
> http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/#sec-example-2

thx, so basically "just" attaching the duty to the permissions?

:licCC-BY-NC a odrl:Set;
    odrl:permission [
        a odrl:Permission;
        odrl:action odrl:reprodice;
        odrl:action odrl:distribute;
        odrl:action odrl:derive;
        odrl:duty _:requirements
    ] ;
    odrl:prohibition [
        a odrl:Prohibition;
        odrl:action odrl:commercialize
    ] .

    _:requirements
        a odrl:Duty ;
        odrl:action odrl:attribute;
        odrl:action odrl:attachPolicy
    ] .

^ That would be the correct representation of the CC-BY-NC license in 
ODRL?

cheers,
simon

---
DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal
Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna

www: http://www.steyskal.info/  twitter: @simonsteys



Am 2015-01-22 06:47, schrieb Renato Iannella:
>> On 21 Jan 2015, at 19:33, Simon Steyskal <ssteyska@wu.ac.at> wrote:
>> 
>> But that would in general contradict the ODRL core model as stated in 
>> [2] if I'm not mistaken?
> 
> Yes, that breaks the model, as it does not directly link the
> obligation of the Duty on performing the Permission actions.
> 
> See the "Offer" example here as a way to express this:
> http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/#sec-example-2
> 
> Cheers...
> Renato Iannella
> Semantic Identity
> http://semanticidentity.com
> Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206

Received on Thursday, 22 January 2015 08:30:15 UTC