Christopher Schmidt wrote:
And *no* level of rights management, technical or otherwise, is going to be the primary factor in changing that. The problem is, at its heart, a social one, and a naming convention, or even social and technical decisions made by OGC, will not change the fact that there is a large social block against sane treatment of geographic data collected by European National Mapping Agencies. Blaming the OGC for that is ridiculous.
Excellent points Chris. I agree that the problem doesn't lie in the fact that there exists a licensing or enforcement system, but in the original providers. This is why "DRM" has such a bad reputation - it hasn't been in the licensing, but the draconian enforcement of that licensing by some providers. In the end, it is about data being published under terms (either open or closed) and those terms being followed and enforced (either by law agencies, technology, or socially) GeoData seems like it could employ some of the existing cases that have shown up for general data. For example, Microformats provide good examples of how to embed licensing for data in HTML: http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-license. It will be important to associate licensing with both general data (this site/service) as well as individual data (such as aggregators/collection sites and services). Andrew _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
