Re: ISSUE-61 (licenseOrRights): dct:license vs. dct:rights [DCAT]

Oops, I must have hit some button twice so Tracker raised the same issue again. I'm deleting it; sorry for the noise.

Richard


On 12 Apr 2013, at 17:46, Government Linked Data Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:

> ISSUE-61 (licenseOrRights): dct:license vs. dct:rights [DCAT]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/issues/61
> 
> Raised by: Richard Cyganiak
> On product: DCAT
> 
> Last Call comment from Jeni Tennison:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-comments/2013Apr/0001.html
> 
> [[[
> In Europe, data publishers have both copyright and database rights over the data that they publish, and may have to reference more than one licence as a result. In addition, there is often extra information that supplements the licence to enable reusers to fulfil it, such as the attribution that they have to provide when they reuse. Having a single link to a licence and not having a mechanism to give this supplementary information might be too simplistic.
> 
> So, I wonder whether it would be better to incorporate dct:rights than dct:license, and link to a rights statement that would include licensing and attribution information both for the copyright and for the database right if there is one.
> 
> I note that in CKAN the link to the licence uses the relation dct:rights. The only things related to licensing in data.gov are around attribution (I believe this is because all US government data is public domain).
> ]]]
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 12 April 2013 16:48:48 UTC