[open-bibliography] A 4 star classification-scheme for open cultural meta-data

[Karen Coyle]

Adrian, I agree with your un-ease about records and collections and  
will add to that... because linked data is about individual  
statements, not records. It is even more difficult to imagine adding a  
license to a single statement that says:

"As You Like It" "was written by" "William Shakespeare"

kc

Quoting Adrian Pohl <adrian.pohl at okfn.org>:

> Hello,
>
> as Jonathan says, the draft classification scheme is now published at
> the LOD-LAM blog and can be commented and discussed there:
> http://lod-lam.net/summit/2011/06/06/proposed-a-4-star-classification-scheme-for-linked-open-cultural-metadata/
>
> I took part in creating the document at the LOD-LAM summit and we had
> some interesting discussions around it.
> I myself have problems with it as it doesn't explicitely say that we
> are talking about _collections_ of metadata. In fact, it isn't said at
> all what "licensing metadata" means, i.e. where to attach the license.
> This is problematic, because if someone only licenses individual
> records, the whole collection could nonetheless be subject to
> intellectual property rights...
>
> Especially, this isn't good in combination with another limitation: The open
> definition is only partly supported by the document. The requirement
> that a work should be made available as a whole isn't supported.
>
> I'll contribute more on this the next days if I get the time...
>
> All the best
> Adrian
>
>
> 2011/6/7 Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray at okfn.org>:
>> Just to follow up on this, as Karen says, this originated from the
>> LOD-LAM conference in San Francisco. I don't have enough domain
>> specific knowledge about how useful this would be for cultural
>> heritage organisations (what needs it is addressing, etc) - but I'm
>> pleased to see that it looks like all 4 options are compliant with
>> OpenDefinition.org.
>>
>> For anyone who uses Google Docs, there is now a conversation in the
>> comments thread which has emerged (and which might be of interest to
>> folks here). For anyone who doesn't use Google Docs, there is now a
>> copy of the document here:
>>
>> http://lod-lam.net/summit/2011/06/06/proposed-a-4-star-classification-scheme-for-linked-open-cultural-metadata/
>>
>> And a response here:
>>
>> http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2011/06/06/peter-suber-on-the-4-star-openness-rating/
>>
>> I will try and ping a few people to see if we can also get a guest
>> blog about this for the OKF Blog!
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Jonathan Gray  
>> <jonathan.gray at okfn.org> wrote:
>>> Thought this might be interesting to people here:
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/10u2bNMShqPQ6sIhcQK6zDl11gMNIzpfE8XPb7aexqac/edit?hl=en_US
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jonathan Gray
>>>
>>> Community Coordinator
>>> The Open Knowledge Foundation
>>> http://blog.okfn.org
>>>
>>> http://twitter.com/jwyg
>>> http://identi.ca/jwyg
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jonathan Gray
>>
>> Community Coordinator
>> The Open Knowledge Foundation
>> http://blog.okfn.org
>>
>> http://twitter.com/jwyg
>> http://identi.ca/jwyg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-bibliography mailing list
>> open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-bibliography
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-bibliography mailing list
> open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-bibliography
>



-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle at kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet