- From: Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
- Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 11:44:32 -0400
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: public-xg-lld@w3.org
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 12:16:38AM +0200, Antoine Isaac wrote:
> Hmm, meanwhile, I've come to terms with the current wording.
> But as I promised it, here's a try (not implemented yet):
> [
> In defining rights for data, owners must strike a balance between the value they perceive for protecting their investment and the impact of usage restrictions, as restrictions only complicate the re-use of data in a Linked Data environment.
> ]
I like it. It looks to me like stating the obvious - something that is left
implicit in the section as currently written and should be made explicit.
I note that this is in a section addressed to "library leaders", and this point addresses
"owners". Maybe the sentence:
It makes sense to seek agreement about rights and licensing at the level of...
...should be just a bit more explicit (i.e., "who" should seek agreement?):
It makes sense for library leaders to seek agreement with owners about rights and licensing at the level of...
???
Tom
--
Tom Baker <tom@tombaker.org>
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2011 15:45:13 UTC