- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 10:32:54 +0000
- To: Renato Iannella <renato@knowledgeflux.com>, "public-ole-comment@w3.org" <public-ole-comment@w3.org>
- Cc: Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>, Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@wu.ac.at>
How about Open Permissions and Obligations? (OPO) I don't think we can use OPEL as it is such a big trademark. On 10/11/2015 00:17, Renato Iannella wrote: > >> On 10 Nov 2015, at 1:52 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote: >> >> But, Renato, I think you have problems with using the word Rights? For me, Open Rights and Obligations seems right. > > Yes…based on the reaction we get from anything “DRM-related”….Rights seems to be a trigger word. > (cf with the public reaction to Encrypted Media Extension [1]) > > Why can still use OPEL if we just use “Permission”? > > Renato Iannella > Head of Innovation and Emerging Technologies, KnowledgeFlux > Level 7, 100 Edward St, Brisbane 4000 AUSTRALIA +61 4 1313 2206 > > > [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/lowering-your-standards > > -- Phil Archer W3C Data Activity Lead http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Tuesday, 10 November 2015 10:33:03 UTC