Yes you are interpreting CC-REL to narrowly. CC-REL is used to be able to communicate as basically as possible what a person can or cannot do with a license. No RDF-triple, knowledge graph, database, rule based systems can be as precise as a legal contract. That is because these legal contracts are not meant for machine communication, they are meant for natural persons. Only by using very narrow definitions can refer to a 'fact' or 'requirement', 'probition', etc. using something like RDF. And that definition is possible :) then you need to use <Work> <CC:license> <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/> That is the most accurate description of Attribution and it needs. Because attribution really also depends on the license.
Cheers, Maarten -- Kennisland | www.kennisland.nl | t +31205756720 | m +31643053919 | @mzeinstra On Jun 24, 2013, at 18:27 , Peter Liljenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > No, I don't expect full RDF representation either, just that cc:attribute > (and the other terms) would be defined as something like "attribute in > compliance with the CC license legal code", and then guidelines to tool > developers on what that means (or even just guidelines). This is how I > started summarising it, but if that is not the intention I appreciate being > corrected straight away: > > The Creative Commons licenses all require attribution, and defines in the > legal code how to do it. ccREL ties [though it seems not formally] these > requirements to the metadata on the work, so that if these properties are set > they must be used in the attribution: > > dcterms:license, cc:license or xhtml:license (synonyms in RFD): the URI > linking to the license terms (e.g. > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) > cc:attributionName: the name of the author and/or designated attribution > parties > dc:title: the title of the work > cc:attributionURL: a URI associated with the work, which should refer to > copyright or licensing information about the work (otherwise there is no > obligation to include the URI, and another property should be used) > > I might be interpreting ccREL too harshly since I'm rather new to this area, > but this is also because I'm coming from the direction "how can this support > tooling and automate attribution". This thread indicates that there's a risk > that a loosely defined cc:attribute (and the other properties too) will cause > tools to implement incorrect license processing. > > /Peter > > > On 24 June 2013 18:12, Nathan Yergler <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't believe there was any expectation that the RDF representation > could fully express the legal code of a license. I think that means > Maarten is correct. > > Of course, there are tools out there that take the attribution > requirement and "just happen" to generate attribution text that > matches what the CC licenses require. I'd have to think about it more > to decide if that's a sane behavior or if they should be checking > something else before deciding to do that. > > NRY > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Peter Liljenberg > <[email protected]> wrote: > > This reminds me of the question the other week about cc:attributionURL vs > > xmpRights:WebStatement, where the response was that cc:attributionURL was > > related to the legal code of the license even though that wasn't fully > > expressed in the ccREL description. That made it map to the semantics of > > xmpRights:WebStatement. > > > > cc:require cc:attribution seems to me to also be related to the legal code > > that specifies exactly what attribution means (e.g. 4b in > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode). Or is it intended to > > be the more generic term described in the RDF schema? > > > > /Peter > > > > > > > > > > On 24 June 2013 17:59, Maarten Zeinstra <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Jonas, > >> > >> To be clear, this is the description of the namespace: > >> > >> "credit be given to copyright holder and/or author" according to > >> view-source:https://creativecommons.org/schema.rdf > >> > >> So I read this as a binary that when present credit should be given. It > >> does not specify a way to do that, and I think it shouldn't as well. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Maarten > >> > >> -- > >> Kennisland > >> | www.kennisland.nl | t +31205756720 | m +31643053919 | @mzeinstra > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Jun 24, 2013, at 17:36 , Jonas Öberg <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> here's a question from IRC which was left hanging. Wondering if anyone > >> here has any thoughts about it :) > >> > >> 09:14 <jonaso> Been looking at > >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/372427 which uses ccREL cc:permits > >> and cc:requires to express licenses which are not CC licenses, ie., FAL. > >> They've coded FAL same as CC BY-SA > >> 09:14 <jonaso> I wonder if that's the intent: ns#Attribution has a > >> specific meaning in the CC vocabulary which is slightly different from > >> FAL's > >> attribution requirement. > >> 09:15 <jonaso> So I wonder if we should think of ccREL ns#Attribution as > >> "requires some attribution, unspecified exactly how, what or when" or if > >> ns#Attribution should mean more exactly the terms of the CC licenses. > >> 09:16 <jonaso> In the latter case, I guess there should be a separate > >> vocabulary to express terms more closely to FAL and other licenses. > >> > >> > >> Sincerely, > >> Jonas > >> _______________________________________________ > >> cc-devel mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> cc-devel mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cc-devel mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > cc-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
_______________________________________________ cc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel
