Perhaps I'm introducing more complexity into the question than necessary. A bit of willful ignorance goes a long way here. With my app for ISWC[1] I ran into the problem of dct:creator vs dct:contributor with Public Sector Information - all from the UN.
In the case of UN LOCODES I was reformatting and making an extract of an ACCESS data base (linked to dbpedia). The information was not available in any sort of web format, so I was rightly a dct:contributor, and the information was Public Domain [2]. In the case of UNESCO World Heritage Sites, I did not create, and contribution was nill. UNESCO was quite clear in their wishes concerning links [3] although they offer an XML version then ask you not to change anything (nod, wink). For the app I settled for a CC Public Domain Mark with a no Personally Identifiable Information caveat (hoping Charlemagne does not mind). --Gannon [1]http://www.rustprivacy.org/2011/phase/iswc2011/index.html [2] http://live.unece.org/cefact/locode/welcome.html [3] http://whc.unesco.org/en/disclaimer/ ________________________________ From: Richard Cyganiak <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 1:28 PM Subject: Advocacy URL for publishing data with an explicit license Dear list, We all know that data publishers *should* publish their data along with an explicit license that explains what kind of re-use is allowed. Can anyone suggest a good reference/link/URL that makes this case? A blog post or advocacy site or similar? Bonus points if it has specific recommendations for RDF. My preferred candidate so far is this – but it's not particularly strong on the “why”: http://www.w3.org/TR/void/#license Thanks, Richard
