<p dir="ltr">This looks like a good solution to me! Thank you for staying on top of it.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 29, 2013 10:08 AM, "John Wieczorek" <<a href="mailto:tuco@berkeley.edu">tuco@berkeley.edu</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Dear all,<br>
<br>
There doesn't seem to be a great deal of interest in this topic based<br>
on the feedback so far. Yet, we have a situation in Darwin Core that<br>
results in an error in schema validation [1] and which must be<br>
resolved. With this message I would like to formally open the 30-day<br>
public commentary period for the solution proposed below. A lack of<br>
dissenting opinion within those 30 days will be taken as a consensus<br>
in favor, after which the solution will be taken to the Executive<br>
Committee for a vote on ratification.<br>
<br>
I propose to deprecate the recommendation to use of dcterms:rights in<br>
Darwin Core in favor of using dcterms:license, which a) better fits<br>
the original intention (see comment at [2]), b) resolves the schema<br>
issue, and [3] permits the continued use of the term<br>
dcterms:accessRights in Darwin Core. The new term has a range<br>
dcterms:LicenseDoument, as Steve pointed out, and this could be<br>
satisfied with URL's pointing to license documents, such as the one in<br>
the existing commentary<br>
(<a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/" target="_blank">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/</a>) - see precedent at<br>
[3].<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
John<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
[1] Bob Morris' issue #196;<br>
<a href="https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=196" target="_blank">https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=196</a><br>
[2] <a href="http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#dcterms:rights" target="_blank">http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#dcterms:rights</a><br>
[3] <a href="http://oeg-dev.dia.fi.upm.es/licensius/blog/?q=node/6" target="_blank">http://oeg-dev.dia.fi.upm.es/licensius/blog/?q=node/6</a><br>
<br>
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Steve Baskauf<br>
<<a href="mailto:steve.baskauf@vanderbilt.edu">steve.baskauf@vanderbilt.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
> In the context of developing the DwC RDF Guide and trying to maintain<br>
> consistency with Audubon Core, I have written on the subject of various<br>
> license-related terms [1]. In particular, I discuss the implications of<br>
> various subproperty relationships that have been asserted for several common<br>
> license-related terms, such as cc:license, xhv:license, and dcterms:license.<br>
> I should note that the issue that Bob brings up also applies to<br>
> dcterms:license because dcterms:license is rdfs:subPropertyOf<br>
> dcterms:rights. [2] So suggesting a license URI as a value for<br>
> dcterms:rights can't be "wrong" because a reasoner could infer that triple<br>
> anyway based on the subproperty relationship.<br>
><br>
> An additional issue is the fact that the range of dcterms:license is<br>
> dcterms:LicenseDocument, a non-literal class. [2] So it would be best to<br>
> NOT use that term with a string literal. In the RDF Guide[3], we recommend<br>
> using legacy dc: namespace terms (where they exist) with literal values [4]<br>
> in cases where DCMI declares non-literal ranges for dcterms: namespace<br>
> terms. Unfortunately, there is no dc: namespace analogue for<br>
> dcterms:license. Because dcterms:license was not part of Darwin Core when<br>
> the guide was written, there is no suggestion for a literal value analogue<br>
> to dcterms:license in the guide itself. But following the lead of Audubon<br>
> Core, the ancillary document [1] suggests that the term xmpRights:UsageTerms<br>
> could be used as a literal value alternative to dcterms:license. I would be<br>
> interested in hearing opinions about whether this suggestion is appropriate<br>
> or not. The ancillary document is informative and not part of any standard<br>
> so it can easily be changed to reflect any consensus about what we consider<br>
> to be a best practice.<br>
><br>
> Steve<br>
><br>
> [1] <a href="http://code.google.com/p/tdwg-rdf/wiki/LicenseProperties" target="_blank">http://code.google.com/p/tdwg-rdf/wiki/LicenseProperties</a><br>
> [2] <a href="http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-license" target="_blank">http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-license</a><br>
> [3] <a href="http://code.google.com/p/tdwg-rdf/wiki/DwcRdfGuideProposal" target="_blank">http://code.google.com/p/tdwg-rdf/wiki/DwcRdfGuideProposal</a><br>
> [4]<br>
> <a href="http://code.google.com/p/tdwg-rdf/wiki/DwcRdfGuideProposal#3.3_Imported_Dublin_Core_terms_that_have_non-literal_objects_and" target="_blank">http://code.google.com/p/tdwg-rdf/wiki/DwcRdfGuideProposal#3.3_Imported_Dublin_Core_terms_that_have_non-literal_objects_and</a><br>
><br>
> John Wieczorek wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Dear all,<br>
>><br>
>> Bob Morris recently submitted an issue [1] to the Darwin Core code<br>
>> site showing a potential ambiguity in the inclusion from Dublin Core<br>
>> of both dcterms:rights and dcterms:accessRights in the Simple Darwin<br>
>> Core schema [2]. The ambiguity arises from the fact that<br>
>> dcterms:accessRights is actually a subclass of dcterms:rights.<br>
>><br>
>> Looking at the Darwin Core documentation about the use of these terms,<br>
>> I noticed that dcterms:rights [3] suggests a license<br>
>> ("<a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/" target="_blank">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/</a>") as an example. I<br>
>> think this example is an inappropriate use for the term and instead is<br>
>> an example of a dcterms:license.<br>
>><br>
>> I think it would be a good idea to add dcterms:license to the list of<br>
>> terms promoted by Darwin Core, especially after reading Peter Desmet's<br>
>> blog posts [4, 5]. If license was indeed the intent for including<br>
>> dcterms:rights in the first place, then perhaps it can be deprecated,<br>
>> leaving only its subtype dcterms:accessRights.<br>
>><br>
>> Discussion welcome, so that I know whether to submit an issue for<br>
>> these changes to the Darwin Core.<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks,<br>
>><br>
>> John<br>
>><br>
>> [1] <a href="https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=196" target="_blank">https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=196</a><br>
>> [2] <a href="https://darwincore.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/xsd/tdwg_dwc_simple.xsd" target="_blank">https://darwincore.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/xsd/tdwg_dwc_simple.xsd</a><br>
>> [3] <a href="http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#dcterms:rights" target="_blank">http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#dcterms:rights</a><br>
>> [4] <a href="http://peterdesmet.com/posts/illegal-bullfrogs.html" target="_blank">http://peterdesmet.com/posts/illegal-bullfrogs.html</a><br>
>> [5]<br>
>> <a href="http://www.canadensys.net/2012/why-we-should-publish-our-data-under-cc0" target="_blank">http://www.canadensys.net/2012/why-we-should-publish-our-data-under-cc0</a><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> tdwg-content mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org">tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content" target="_blank">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer<br>
> Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences<br>
><br>
> postal mail address:<br>
> PMB 351634<br>
> Nashville, TN 37235-1634, U.S.A.<br>
><br>
> delivery address:<br>
> 2125 Stevenson Center<br>
> 1161 21st Ave., S.<br>
> Nashville, TN 37235<br>
><br>
> office: 2128 Stevenson Center<br>
> phone: <a href="tel:%28615%29%20343-4582" value="+16153434582">(615) 343-4582</a>, fax: <a href="tel:%28615%29%20322-4942" value="+16153224942">(615) 322-4942</a><br>
> If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.<br>
> <a href="http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu" target="_blank">http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu</a><br>
><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
tdwg-content mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org">tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content" target="_blank">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content</a><br>
</blockquote></div>