Re: FW: Questions re POE.UC.01

Dear all,

I had pending to solve this -the last days I was attending in a 
Conference. The next iteration should be faster :)
Please see below my answers in red colour.

> *From:*Víctor Rodríguez Doncel [mailto:vrodriguez@fi.upm.es]
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 23, 2016 8:26 PM
> *To:* public-poe-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-poe-wg@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Questions re POE.UC.01
>
> Dear Michael, all,
>
> Thanks for your comments. Please find my answer below.
>
> El 21/04/2016 20:56, Michael Steidl (IPTC) escribió:
>
>     Hi Victor,
>
>     some questions regarding requirements of your POE.UC.01 -
>     https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases
>
>     ·Re r(equirement) 5: what are the special and specific features of
>     a **common** license and the **linguistic** domain
>
> By "linguistic domain" we were meaning "language resources" (data or 
> tools), e.g., dictionaries, terminological term banks, translation 
> memories, corpora
> By "common license", we were meaning those commonly used for those 
> resources. For example, in CLARIN [1] or in META-SHARE [2]
>
> MS: I suggest that we list such examples in the requirements as a POE 
> feature can be tested against CLARIN and META-SHARE but not against 
> “common license” – same for linguistic domain.
>
I agree. I suggest the following sample licenses to be added.
META-SHARE_Commercial_NoRedistribution
META-SHARE_Commercial_NoRedistribution_For-a-Fee
META-SHARE Commercial NoRedistribution NoDerivatives_For-a-fee
META-SHARE Commercial NoRedistribution NoDerivatives
META-SHARE NonCommercial NoRedistribution NoDerivatives_For-a-fee
META-SHARE NonCommercial NoRedistribution NoDerivatives
META-SHARE NonCommercial NoRedistribution_For-a-Fee
META-SHARE NonCommercial NoRedistribution
All of them available at: http://www.meta-net.eu/meta-share/licenses

As well as:
CLARIN RES+BY+NORED
CLARIN RES+BY+NC+NORED
CLARIN RES+FF+BY+LRT+NORED
CLARIN ACA+BY+NORED
CLARIN ACA+BY+NC+NORED
https://www.clarin.eu/content/license-categories

>     ·Re r 7: “… from an …” -> “… from an …” ?
>
>     ·Re r 7: what means creating a new resource from an existing
>     resource … maybe: deriving? (see r 13)
>
> Yes, deriving. In this case, the publication of derivative works must 
> be reported (unsure about the meaning of "redeposit", we can ask).
>
>     ·Re r 10: “complete manner“ – does that mean the policy includes
>     exactly how to attribute?
>
> Yes, with specific indications (I have usually seen the specification 
> of the email/name to be attributed. But also (rare) the location/size 
> of a logo)
>
>     ·Re r 14: “within” = the policy defines explicitly the fee,
>     “outside” =  the policy defines that the fee has to be agreed
>     outside the policy’s scope
>
> The actual price is not specified in the policy, but in an external 
> resource (for example accessible via http request)
>
>     ·Re r 16: … to use policy templates to create a final, “real” policy?
>
> I see two options.
> 1) The policy template is not a policy until the "gaps" are filled --> 
> simple, but this requires a non-expert to modify a possibly complex 
> expression
> 2) Two metadata records describe a resource: 
> "licenseTemplate=TEMPLATE24", "price=1 EUR". This is the preferred 
> option by non-experts, but anomalous for ODRL.
>
> ???MS: I suggest to include these details – as this is different to 
> what ODRL and possibly other RELs expect: if a policy/license can be 
> accessed by a URL then the complete syntax is in the response. I 
> understand your second option as “some (explicit) placeholders in the 
> policy template must be virtually replaced by parameters in the URL 
> requesting it, only then the full policy is available.” (Is this the 
> best option or should we recommend that this is done by the server 
> responding to the URL: it takes the parameters, replaces the 
> placeholders of an internal template and sends the ready-to-use and 
> complete policy – and is this something which should be defined by POE 
> or is this a job for implementers of POE.)
>
In my opinion this is the most interesting requirements derived from 
this requirement, as it is an structural one. I do not know how to 
formulate, as I do not want to anticipate the solution. I suggest:
- Leaving the use case as it is, adding two requirements:
- 1 To add "template" as another kind of policy. A template is defined 
to be an ODRL policy with some values being undefined.
- 2 To add an expected behaviour when retrieving a policy. Thus:
http://company.com/odrltemplate1--> retrieves the ODRL policy template
http://company.com/odrltemplate1?price=100&currency=EUR--> retrieves the 
ODRL policy with the "price" and "currency" fields filled in.

>     ·Re r 17: please examples of categories – policy category is not
>     an unambiguous term
>
> In different dimensions. For example, in [1], one dimension licenses 
> is "public", "academic", and "with restrections". Other dimension can 
> be "for data", "for software", "for general IP works".
>
> ???MS: are that really categories of policies or are that categories 
> of a) the licensees and b) the assets?
>
I think you are right, they are categories of licensees and categories 
of assets.
>
>     ·Re r 18: what should have this ability of referencing? “this”
>     policy, or something else? What is the role of “this policy” in
>     the latter case?
>
> Think of a "ODBC Public Domain Dedication and License 1.0". I may want 
> to reference its machine readable version, but it has no standard URI 
> (nor standard codification). The URIs at [3] have been used, but 
> another equally stable domain might be proposed --for example as 
> references to a non-normative part of the POE spec.
>
> ???MS: is this a features which has to be defined by POE as what you 
> describe is how to access a POE policy.
>
I believe we should specify that "a good practice" is making policies 
dereferenceable. Not much useful for private use of policies, incredibly 
useful for public licenses.


I have updated the wiki accordingly.
Again, sorry for the huge delay in the follow up.
Víctor

>     Thanks for clarifications,
>
> You are welcome!
> Víctor
>
> [1] https://www.clarin.eu/content/license-categories
> [2] http://www.meta-net.eu/meta-share/licenses
> [3] http://rdflicense.linkeddata.es/
>
>     Michael
>
>     IPTC
>
>
>
> -- 
> Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel
> D3205 - Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
> Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
> Facultad de Informática
> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
> Campus de Montegancedo s/n
> Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, Spain
> Tel. (+34) 91336 3672
> Skype: vroddon3

-- 
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