Re: Proposal for defining licenses

note that such a type is a potential superclass for BusinessFunction, because the latter specifies bundles of rights.

---------------------------------------
martin hepp
www:  http://www.heppnetz.de/
email: mhepp@computer.org


> On 24. Aug 2017, at 09:21, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
> 
> There may be scope to expand around http://schema.org/Permit for more civic society / egov scenarios.
> 
> We have always avoided getting into anything too fancy for online permissions/licenses, drm, etc eg that might be mistaken as having a robots.txt kind of a role. It would be easy to do more harm than good there.
> 
> In particular, just as we don't expect schema.org consumer apps to understand medicine even if they do have some hardcoded support for medical/health-related terms, similarly with licences, permits etc. Consuming apps won't grasp the full legal picture any more than the full medical one, and we should be careful not to exaggerate the extent to which consumers might understand "permits....".
> 
> All that said, can http://schema.org/Permit be used or improved here?
> 
> Dan
> 
> On 23 Aug 2017 13:36, "Eric Franzon" <eric.franzon@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good poi be snts, David. And welcome! 
> 
> I think certifications, licenses, permits, and the like could be housed under a single type. However, I don't yet know what that might be. At the moment, an Organization or Person can have an "award" (http://schema.org/award), but none of these additional types we're discussing seems to fit that well. 
> 
> As I mentioned in my response to Pete, I think that this is probably better suited to licenses where there is a desire on the license holder's part to make the license transparent and public. 
> 
> Cheers,
> --Eric
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 2:14 PM, David Pierce <david.dean.pierce@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi! New to the schema.org community and discussions, but I'm excited to learn more about how these discussions work (the implication also being that you should feel free to beat me into shape while I'm unfamiliar with this community's conventions).
>> 
>> Thinking about scenarios, I could see this being relevant to Organizations, LocalBusiness, and individual practitioners (dentists, lawyers, etc.). Restaurants are a good example, though it doesn't seem very typical since the legal requirement in the US is usually to have the license on display in the physical premises, but it doesn't seem very conventional or necessary to have it on the website.
>> 
>> However, "certifications" do seem like something a business may want to advertise on its web site. For example, a business may want to advertise its LEED certification. Skimming through the types, I don't see anything related to a "certificate".
>> 
>> I think the common thread is an entity may want to document a signal of recognition awarded to it by an authoritative body. It seems like both licenses and certifications fall under both.
>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1:05 PM Pete Rivett <pete.rivett@adaptive.com> wrote:
>>> Firstly are we talking about types of license (e.g. California Driving License) or specific instances (e.g. Pete’s California Driving License with number NNNN). I’m guessing Eric you have in mind the latter, but not sure what Schema.org scenarios would need that. I suppose it could be useful information about a business e.g. whether an Electrician is licensed. Not sure about driving licenses though.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Other things:
>>> 
>>> Who the license is issued to (Organization/Person)
>>> Geography/location (e.g. a driving license is for a particular country, a fishing license for a particular area)
>>> Terms and conditions
>>> There may be value in distinguishing who is providing the license (DMV generally) and who actually issued it (e.g. a specific DMV office or clerk)
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Would this also apply to:
>>> 
>>> Passports (could be viewed as a license to travel)
>>> software licenses?
>>> license to watch HBO or access NY Times paywall on n devices?
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Pete
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Pete  Rivett (pete.rivett@adaptive.com)
>>> 
>>> CTO, Adaptive Inc
>>> 
>>> 65 Enterprise, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
>>> 
>>> cell: +1 949 338 3794
>>> 
>>> Follow me on Twitter @rivettp or http://twitter.com/rivettp
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> From: Eric Franzon [mailto:eric.franzon@gmail.com] 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 12:47 PM
>>> To: schema.org Mailing List <public-schemaorg@w3.org>
>>> Subject: Proposal for defining licenses
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I'm thinking that there is a need for license as a property beyond the current domain and range defined in http://schema.org/license. 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Licenses can be held by a Person or Organization to perform a particular action (hunting, fishing, demonstrating, busking, driving, operating a particular piece of equipment, operating a business, providing a regulated service, etc.). 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Would this be best as a new type (maybe child of CreativeWork?) leveraging new and existing properties such as: 
>>> 
>>> licenseNumber: (text)
>>> licenceType: (text)
>>> licenseIssuedBy: (Organization/Person)
>>> dateIssued: http://schema.org/dateIssued (Date - currently only applies to tickets)
>>> expires: http://schema.org/expires (Date - currently on CreativeWork) 
>>> I'm just beginning to think on this, but have already run into several use cases "in the wild" that could benefit from being able to explicitly state a particular license. 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Does anyone else see this need?
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> --Eric
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> Eric Axel Franzon
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ericfranzon
>>> 
>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/EricAxel
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Eric Axel Franzon
> 
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ericfranzon
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/EricAxel
> G+: http://http://gplus.to/ericfranzon
>