On 9/11/12 3:12 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> I know what 'provenance' means, come on.
I didn't say you didn't. Sorry if you misunderstood.
>
> Yes, I understand if one statement comes from Amazon and another from
> OCLC, they could have seperate attribution/provenance. You're missing
> my potential cases.
>
> i start out ingesting data from OCLC into my system. Okay, the title
> statement "Makbeth" comes from OCLC, and needs attribution/provenance
> data there to comply with their license.
No, read their license. There is no attribution on the records or data
elements. ODC-BY refers to the database, and OCLC gives this as the form
of attribution:
* The recommended form of attribution for WorldCat is:
"This [title of report or article or dataset or service]
contains OCLC WorldCat <http://www.worldcat.org/> information
made available under the ODC Attribution License
<http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/>. The OCLC
Cooperative requests that uses of WorldCat derived data
contained in this work conform with the WorldCat Community Norms
<http://www.oclc.org/us/en/worldcat/recorduse/policy/odcbynorms.htm>"
* Special cases: In circumstances where providing the full attribution
statement above is not technically feasible, the use of canonical
WorldCat URIs is adequate to satisfy Section 4.3 of the ODC
Attribution License <http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/>
So I don't think your hypothetical fits this case.
>
> >
> > Again, I'm a bit confused. Are you thinking that linked data provenance
> > would be used in licensing OCLC data? I haven't heard anything that
> > would imply that
>
> I may the one that's confused, but I thought that was what we were
> talking about! This thread is about OCLC's recommendation to use an
> attribution license. In at least some places, OCLC claims to be
> licensing their data under an ODC-BY license requiring attribution
> already.
Not in the way that they are requiring it -- again, read their
documentation. Attribution is on the data set, not individual data, and
you only need to say that "WorldCat data was used in this project."
>
> I think the linked data provenance work is neat and I'm glad they are
> doing; I think it's unfortunate for OCLC to license data, or recommend
> others license days, in such a way that many uses will require such
> fairly innovative technology to comply with the license.
Again, read the license documentation at:
http://www.oclc.org/us/en/data/attribution.html
There is no requirement to use element-level provenance. Unfortunately,
none of the press releases included a link to this attribution page, and
I still cannot find it by following links on the site. I was pointed to
it by Richard Wallis; it's possible that the authors of the blog post
had not seen that because their assumptions about attribution do not,
IMO, match this documentation.
I agree that PDDL would be cleaner than ODC-BY, but neither applies to
individual records or data points. OCLC simply asks for attribution in
your site or project documentation. Note that Harvard does include such
attribution [1], so even though they have said "CC0" on their data, they
are very close to what OCLC asks for, and OCLC admits that. [2]
kc
[1] http://openmetadata.lib.harvard.edu/bibdata/useterms
[2] http://hangingtogether.org/?p=1647
--
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Tue Sep 11 2012 - 21:07:28 EDT