Re: Help with ODRL

Hi Vincent, we briefly discussed the below at our teleconference on Monday [1].

We want to better understand the use cases driving the JSON-LD example at [2].

Looking at the complete list of "Article Sharing Framework Policies” [3] there is clear pattern we can follow in all the table matrices.
Policy 50 (all green) would be the best to look at as all the others should be expressible if we turn off that “bit” in the policy template.

Some questions first:

1) The policy permits the “o:distribute” action for the target asset “schema:ScholarlyArticle”.
a)We assume this is the set of assets that a specific Publisher has with the category of "schema:ScholarlyArticle”?
Assuming all the constraints are met, then those assets can be distributed.

2) There seems to be four constraints asf:platform, asf:audience, jav:journal_article_version, and asf:displayable_element
Some of these seem to apply to the distribution, and some to the actual asset (hence, some will be expressed as odrl refinements).
a) is the platform the system used by the publishers to distribute, or the audience to consume the asset?
b) is asf:platform the same as o:systemDevice [4] ?
c) is asf:audience the same as o:recipient [5]?
d) is jav:journal_article_version the same as o:version [6]?

3) asf:displayable_element seems less of a constraint but more like a permitted action (o:display) with 4 specific refinement (constraints)?

4) Some feedback on the embedded JSON-LD policy at [7] (view source to see).
a) the dc:license should not refer to the (same) policy itself
b) there is no need for the "conflict":”prohibit” statement, as there are no prohibitions to take precedence.

5) Is there a need to express the Assigner of the Policy (ie the publisher identifier)?

We can look at the detail of the permissions next...

Cheers - Renato

[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-odrl/2021Apr/0006.html <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-odrl/2021Apr/0006.html>
[2] https://gitlab.com/vincentml/asf#asf-sharing-policy-generator <https://gitlab.com/vincentml/asf#asf-sharing-policy-generator>
[3] https://vincentml.gitlab.io/asf/
[4] https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-vocab/#term-systemDevice <https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-vocab/#term-systemDevice>
[5] https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-vocab/#term-recipient <https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-vocab/#term-recipient>
[6] https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-vocab/#term-version <https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-vocab/#term-version>
[7] https://vincentml.gitlab.io/asf/policy-050-v1-0.html



> On 8 Apr 2021, at 15:29, Lizzi, Vincent <Vincent.Lizzi@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Renato,
>  
> Thank you very much for your reply and offer of support!
>  
> The current work on NISO Access & License Indicators is to support a new use case for social platforms to automatically identify the conditions under which copyrighted articles can be shared legally in accordance with publisher policies. We have made some progress on an approach that uses a combination of ALI, ODRL, and Crossref DOIs to create sharing policies that are machine actionable. It would be very helpful to receive your advice about this use of ODRL.
>  
> In this use case, every article has metadata stored in Crossref. The article metadata will include one or more <ali:license_ref> elements that hold a DOI URL that points to a sharing policy page. Each sharing policy page describes what kind of sharing is allowed, and can be identified by its DOI URL and contains metadata in ODRL JSON-LD format. In this way, a social platform can use the article metadata to automatically find out if an article has a sharing policy and the conditions for legal sharing that are allowed by the policy. There are some overviews that contain more details at https://www.stm-assoc.org/asf/ <https://www.stm-assoc.org/asf/> and athttps://gitlab.com/vincentml/asf#asf-sharing-policy-generator <https://gitlab.com/vincentml/asf#asf-sharing-policy-generator>
>  
> A draft of a sharing policy that has metadata in ODRL JSON-LD format is available at https://vincentml.gitlab.io/asf/policy-001-v1-0.html <https://vincentml.gitlab.io/asf/policy-001-v1-0.html>. The ODRL JSON-LD metadata is in a <script> tag and can be seen by viewing the HTML source. The @context of the JSON-LD uses a DOI URL https://doi.org/10.15223/asf-vocabulary <https://doi.org/10.15223/asf-vocabulary> that has not been created yet but will redirect to https://vincentml.gitlab.io/asf/asf-vocabulary.jsonld <https://vincentml.gitlab.io/asf/asf-vocabulary.jsonld>. The ODRL in this draft has been tested using https://json-ld.org/playground/ <https://json-ld.org/playground/> and some standard JSON parsers. However, this draft is based on what I have learned by reading the ODRL 2.2 specifications. It would be helpful to receive advice from someone like yourself who has more knowledge about ODRL. 
>  
> One challenge that we have is how to use ODRL to represent a sharing policy that has an embargo. For example, a policy that has an embargo might allow an article to be shared only after 12 months past the date when the article was published. A constraint could be written as elapsedTime gt P12M, or a constraint could be written as delayPeriod gt P12M. How can a constraint indicate that publication date is the basis for the duration, and is it better to use elapsedTime or delayPeriod?
>  
> Kind regards,
> Vincent
>  
> _____________________________________________
> Vincent M. Lizzi
> Head of Information Standards | Taylor & Francis Group
> vincent.lizzi@taylorandfrancis.com <mailto:vincent.lizzi@taylorandfrancis.com>
>