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

Kingsley is pretty much spot on.

1. Give attribution to Schema.org, could be as simple as an included
readme.txt that says "Thanks DanBri and Schema.org stakeholders! You saved
our asses on this project!" ...
2. Also you must provide a link to the Schema.org license:
http://schema.org/docs/terms.html  (somewhere, anywhere, in your project,
website, extended vocabulary, whatever, wherever) ... and ...
3. Document and share with the world in that same readme.txt or website, or
wherever, of any changes you may have made to Schema.org vocabulary or
developed extension / terms to the vocabulary that you have made as well.
4. Your done !

In fact... I would encourage the stakeholders and DanBri to actually put
something like those 4 steps into the Schema.org license link to make it
easy to understand for anyone unfamiliar with CC-BY-SA.

+1 Make it easier for developers and contributors to actually DO the
Sharealike by providing some simple steps such as above !  Otherwise,
change the darn license to just CC-BY.

-- 
-Thad
+ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>
Thad on LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>


On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
wrote:

> On 7/16/14 8:15 AM, martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote:
>
>> That is understood, but the key issue for some adopters seems to be
>>
>>         • ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the
>> material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as
>> the original.
>>
>> If you develop a commercial product or specificiation that builds upon
>> schema.org, thus binds you to release the result under a Creative
>> Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, too.
>>
>> The question is what "remix, transform, or build upon the material"
>> means. For instance, if you add schema.org markup to your HTML, does
>> that mean that your whole HTML page must be released the under a Creative
>> Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license?
>>
>> There are potential implications that are problematic for adopters of
>> schema.org.
>>
>> This is why GoodRelations uses the broader Creative Commons Attribution
>> 3.0 license, which just requires attribution.
>>
>
> +1
>
> Ultimately, this issue always come back to the same issue of Attribution.
>
> You shouldn't reuse the creative works of others without attribution,
> bottom line.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
> Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
> Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this
>
>
>