RE: [Fwd: Re: on expressing access constraints in a data repositoryof mixed openness]

I hope this doesn't muddy the waters too much, but it also occurs to me
that SOME Linked Data "real world objects" ARE "information resources".
This use case probably gets to the core of why librarians find Linked
Data so disconcerting.

Compare the metadata licensing example I gave below for person (a
"non-information resource" "real world object") with this example for
Book (the disconcerting intersection of "information resource" and "real
world object"):

:hamlet a bibo:Book ;
	dct:license cc:publicdomain ;
	foaf:page :hamlet/ .

:hamlet/ a foaf:Document ;
	dct:license BSD .

Here are the URIs in this example:

http://example.org/book/hamlet [303 (See Other) redirect to...]
http://example.org/book/hamlet/ [200 (OK) content-negotiate to...]
http://example.org/book/hamlet/about.html
http://example.org/book/hamlet/about.rdf

In this case, the license asserted for "Hamlet" (conceptually a "Book")
is Creative Commons "Public Domain" and the license asserted against the
content-negotiable "about" (metadata) resources is "BSD".

In principle, it could be possible to negotiate content vs. metadata
from the :hamlet RWO URI, because in principle both are reasonable Web
document "representations" of the real world object. If you do this,
though, the Cool URIs document recommends using "303 URIs forwarding to
Different Documents" <http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/#r303uri> instead.
Here's an example:

http://example.org/book/hamlet [303 (See Other) redirect to...]

http://example.org/book/hamlet/content.html
http://example.org/book/hamlet/about.rdf

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Young,Jeff (OR)
> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 11:27 AM
> To: 'William Waites'
> Cc: Monica Duke; public-xg-lld
> Subject: RE: [Fwd: Re: on expressing access constraints in a data
> repositoryof mixed openness]
> 
> William,
> 
> I don't think it quite makes sense that way. I would argue that the
> domain of the BSD license needs to be an "information resource" in
> order to be meaningful. From a Linked Data perspective, people are
non-
> information resources. Perhaps it could be modeled like this:
> 
> :ww a foaf:Person ;
> 	foaf:page :ww/ .
> 
> :ww/ a foaf:Document ;
> 	dct:license BSD .
> 
> Here, I'm assuming that :ww/ is the generic document associated (via
> 303 See Other) with the :ww real world object. Spelling this out as
> URIs and behaviors could look like this:
> 
> Non-information resource:
> http://example.org/person/ww  [303 (See Other) redirect to...]
> 
> Information resources:
> http://example.org/person/ww/ [200 (OK) content-negotiate to...]
> http://example.org/person/ww/about.html
> http://example.org/person/ww/about.rdf
> 
> I would argue that asserting the license on the generic resource
> implies licensing restrictions for all the web document
representations
> that it entails.
> 
> Jeff
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: William Waites [mailto:william.waites@okfn.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 11:03 AM
> > To: Young,Jeff (OR)
> > Cc: Monica Duke; public-xg-lld
> > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: on expressing access constraints in a data
> > repositoryof mixed openness]
> >
> > On 10-09-22 15:26, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
> > > - Include license and restrictions assertions in the RDF for each
> > > individual. (Maybe just on the individuals identified with 303
> URIs?)
> >
> > Does this make sense?
> >
> > :ww a foaf:Person ;
> >     dc:license BSD .
> >
> > I think licenses goes on a document/graph and not on
> > an individual.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -w
> > --
> > William Waites           <william.waites@okfn.org>
> > Mob: +44 789 798 9965    Open Knowledge Foundation
> > Fax: +44 131 464 4948                Edinburgh, UK
> >
> > RDF Indexing, Clustering and Inferencing in Python
> > 		http://ordf.org/

Received on Wednesday, 22 September 2010 16:15:46 UTC