- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 12:19:51 -0400
- To: public-vocabs@w3.org
- Message-ID: <53C6A627.5030005@openlinksw.com>
On 7/16/14 11:00 AM, James M Snell wrote: > > OK, scenario (just out of curiosity): I create a generalized triple > store as a hosted service. None of my code directly uses schema.org > <http://schema.org> terms but nothing stops my users (whom I don't > about know in advance) from using my service to store data using > schema.org <http://schema.org> terms. In my code, all terms are > indexed for searching, so once the schema.org <http://schema.org> > terms are pushed in, they can be searched and pivoted on in a variety > of ways (none of which are specific to schema.org > <http://schema.org>). Am I in violation of the schema.org > <http://schema.org> terms by not providing attribution to schema.org > <http://schema.org> when my system is clearly agnostic towards the > specific use of schema.org <http://schema.org>? > > - James > As you said "all terms are indexed for searching" , which means you aren't agnostic. You put this creative work (produced by others) to use in your specific app(s). It provided value etc.. All your app has to do is make an acknowledgement of its use (re., indexing with search in mind) of schema.org terms, assuming your app doesn't benefit from use of URIs as opposed to local identifiers etc.. Kingsley > On Jul 16, 2014 1:23 AM, "Matthias Tylkowski" <matthias@binarypark.org > <mailto:matthias@binarypark.org>> wrote: > > Hello Everyone, > as the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike > <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/> License states > you can do anything with the Schema classes and properties what > you like: put them in your triple store, mix them with other > ontologies, use them im your software, ... > > Regards > Matthias Tylkowski > > Technischer Leiter > Binarypark UG (haftungsbeschränkt) > Erich-Weinert-Str. 1 > 03046 Cottbus > Tel +49 (0)355 692931 > Fax +49 (0)355 694171 > info@binarypark.org <mailto:info@binarypark.org> > http://binarypark.org > > Am 16.07.2014 09:48, schrieb Marc Twagirumukiza: >> Hi there, >> +1 Bernard. >> I would debate this topic of reusing schema.org >> <http://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 <http://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 >> <http://schema.org> terms and conditions. >> The second level is at scientific/consistency level: e.g. >> schema.org <http://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 <http://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://www.agfahealthcare.com/> >> http://blog.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> >> <mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com> >> To: "martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org" >> <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> >> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> >> <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> >> Cc: Lloyd Fassett <lloyd@azteria.com> <mailto:lloyd@azteria.com>, >> Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> >> <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force >> <public-vocabs@w3.org> <mailto:public-vocabs@w3.org> >> Date: 16/07/2014 09:22 >> Subject: Re: Question about schema.org <http://schema.org> in a >> triple store? >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> Hi all >> >> And what about reusing _schema.org_ >> <http://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_ <http://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_ >> <http://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_ >> <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org><_martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org_ >> <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>>: >> On 15 Jul 2014, at 23:21, Lloyd Fassett <_lloyd@azteria.com_ >> <mailto: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_ <http://schema.org/>to mark-up your content. >> This scenario is well-covered by the existing terms. >> >> 2. Use _schema.org_ <http://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_ >> <http://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_ <http://schema.org/>. In this scenario, you >> use _schema.org_ <http://schema.org/>AND content from third >> parties. The sponsors of _schema.org_ <http://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_ <http://schema.org/>or third >> parties. In scenario 1, the sponsors of _schema.org_ >> <http://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_ <mailto:martin.hepp@unibw.de> >> phone: _+49-(0)89-6004-4217_ <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217> >> fax: _+49-(0)89-6004-4620_ <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620> >> 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_ <http://www.mondeca.com/> >> Follow us on Twitter : _@mondecanews_ >> <http://twitter.com/#%21/mondecanews> >> ---------------------------------------------------------- > -- 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
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 16:20:14 UTC