Re: Question about schema.org in a triple store?

Hi there,
+1  Bernard.
I would debate this topic of  reusing schema.org predicates and classes in 
other vocabularies in two ways:
One, purely licence level. There, like my colleague am not a lawyer but I 
think we need to handle this in simple way: schema.org would decline any 
responsibility of any use of the predicates/classes beyond defined EUL. No 
prevent to re-use but this doesn't bind schema.org terms and conditions.
The second level is at scientific/consistency level: e.g. schema.org 
documentation says: "It is also explicitly not a goal to support automated 
reasoning, medical records coding, or genomic tagging, all of which would 
require substantially more detailed (and hence high barrier-to-entry) 
modeling and markup". Currently schema.org is being largely used in 
clinical model patterns-despite this statement, but again here it's at 
user's risk. 
Further discussions on this may be required.

Kind Regards,

Marc Twagirumukiza | Agfa HealthCare
Senior Clinical Researcher | HE/Advanced Clinical Applications Research
T  +32 3444 8188 | M  +32 499 713 300

http://www.agfahealthcare.com
http://blog.agfahealthcare.com
Click on link to read important disclaimer: 
http://www.agfahealthcare.com/maildisclaimer 



From:   Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
To:     "martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org" 
<martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Cc:     Lloyd Fassett <lloyd@azteria.com>, Melvin Carvalho 
<melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force 
<public-vocabs@w3.org>
Date:   16/07/2014 09:22
Subject:        Re: Question about schema.org in a triple store?



Hi all

And what about reusing schema.org predicates and classes in other 
vocabularies? 
See http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/details/vocabulary_schema.html for 
various (and growing) use and reuse cases. When the copyright ontology (of 
all vocabularies) at http://rhizomik.net/ontologies/copyrightonto.owl 
asserts that cro:PublicPlace rdfs:subClassOf  schema:Place
Does it bind by schema.org terms and conditions?
And when I copy this triple here, do I?

There are so many ways a vocabulary class and predicate can be used, 
either in the open Web or in data or application silos, that it seems 
impossible to enforce any kind of terms of use. Should every triple using 
a schema.org element assert its provenance? It seems a completely 
unrealistic requirement. Disclaimer :I'm not a lawyer, far from it ...




2014-07-15 23:51 GMT+02:00 martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org <
martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>:
On 15 Jul 2014, at 23:21, Lloyd Fassett <lloyd@azteria.com> wrote:

> Melvin, Martin,
>
> I'm glad this thread started as it seems clear to me that the license 
for Schema only applies to publishing information and have been meaning to 
bring it up.  I believe it's related to what Melvin is asking as his use 
case is also an 'other than publishing' issue.  There seems to be no right 
to consume or use Schema markup in the license other than to publish 
information using the markup.
>
> The key part from the license is
>
> "These Terms of Service govern your use of the Website, which contains a 
schema specifying a vocabulary you can use in a web document "
>
> and then that part is covered by CC-AS3.
>
> Am I right?  We can only publish but not consume or use the markup in 
any other way?

I think there are THREE main scenarios:

1. Use schema.org to mark-up your content. This scenario is well-covered 
by the existing terms.

2. Use schema.org as a data structure in other scenarios, like software 
applications, protocols, etc. In this scenario, it is particularly unclear 
whether the resulting software is subject to the "share-alike" 
requirement.
It would be nice if the sponsors of schema.org could clarify this in order 
to foster innovation.

3. Consume Web content from third party sites that are marked-up using 
schema.org. In this scenario, you use schema.org AND content from third 
parties. The sponsors of schema.org cannot grant you any rights on other 
people's site content.

In scenarios 2 and 3, you may also be violating patents held by the 
sponsors of schema.org or third parties. In scenario 1, the sponsors of 
schema.org will grant you a "an option to receive a license under 
reasonable and non-discriminatory terms without royalty, solely for the 
purpose of including markup of structured data in a webpage, where the 
markup is based on and strictly complies with the Schema.".

Best wishes / Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Martin Hepp

-------------------------------------------------------
martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail:  martin.hepp@unibw.de
phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
         http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:   mfhepp
twitter: mfhepp

Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
=================================================================
* Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/






-- 
Bernard Vatant
Vocabularies & Data Engineering
Tel :  + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59
Skype : bernard.vatant
http://google.com/+BernardVatant
--------------------------------------------------------
Mondeca                             
35 boulevard de Strasbourg 75010 Paris
www.mondeca.com
Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews
----------------------------------------------------------