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

re Danbri:

The page-centric language on the site stems from its original use cases;
it would be reasonable to expect us to work on improving that at some
point, but I think the Creative Commons license it cites is clear
enough - http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0


+1

My confusion isn't what CC license says.  It's that the license seems to
only apply to page-centric  usage.

Thanks for chiming in from vacation.

Lloyd Fassett
Azteria Inc.
Bend, OR
(541) 848-2440 (PST)


On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
wrote:

>  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 terms but
> nothing stops my users (whom I don't about know in advance) from using my
> service to store data using schema.org terms. In my code, all terms are
> indexed for searching, so once the 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). Am I in violation of the schema.org terms by not
> providing attribution to schema.org when my system is clearly agnostic
> towards the specific use of 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>
> 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 694171info@binarypark.orghttp://binarypark.org
>>
>> Am 16.07.2014 09:48, schrieb Marc Twagirumukiza:
>>
>> 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>
>> <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
>> To:        "martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org"
>> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>> Cc:        Lloyd Fassett <lloyd@azteria.com> <lloyd@azteria.com>, Melvin
>> Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, W3C Web
>> Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org> <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* <http://schema.org/> predicates and
>> classes in other vocabularies?
>> See *http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/details/vocabulary_schema.html*
>> <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*
>> <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*
>> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> <*martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org*
>> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>>:
>> On 15 Jul 2014, at 23:21, Lloyd Fassett <*lloyd@azteria.com*
>> <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* <martin.hepp@unibw.de>
>> phone:   *+49-(0)89-6004-4217* <%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217>
>> fax:     *+49-(0)89-6004-4620* <%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620>
>> www:     *http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/*
>> <http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/> (group)
>>          *http://www.heppnetz.de/* <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/*
>> <http://purl.org/goodrelations/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Bernard Vatant*
>> Vocabularies & Data Engineering
>> Tel :  + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59
>> Skype : bernard.vatant
>> *http://google.com/+BernardVatant* <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
>
>