[Odrl-version2] DMAG-UPF comments on ODRL 2.0 Requirements
Jaime Delgado
jaime.delgado at upf.edu
Thu Nov 11 00:01:35 EST 2004
Dear Colleagues,
Here you are a few comments on the ODRL 2.0 Requirements from our side.
I am including them as plain text (complemented with the attached JPG
figure). To facilitate reading, I am also attaching a Word document with
everything.
Best regards,
Jaime Delgado.
===============================
DMAG-UPF comments on ODRL 2.0 Requirements
Jaime Delgado, Roberto García, José Prados, Eva Rodríguez
November 2004
Comment 1
Requirement 1.3 says “ODRL requires the additional expressiveness to the
respective status information” and there is an example, where if the
customer has played a ring tone already 10 times, this information is
needed in the ODRL expressions. We think that this status information, for
example the number of times that a user exercises a right, does not have to
be included in an ODRL expression. ODRL should be a language to express
rights, but not a language to express status information, that should be an
implementation issue. If we represent this type of status information in a
license, then it will be necessary to access to the license and to modify
it every time the user exercises a right. On the other hand, if we allow
local modifications of a license, we will be leaving an open door to a
future fraudulent use. A solution could be that every time a license must
be modified, it should be necessary to revoke it and to request a new one.
Comment 2
During the last months we have been in contact with some content providers
and others companies, in the context of the AXMEDIS European project in
which we are working now, and we would like to propose a case that could be
interesting to consider in ODRL 2.0:
- A condition expressed in an ODRL License about the possibility of
exercising a right over a resource can be started in a certain and “static”
moment, as it could be the moment of generating a license or a certain
date; but it could be also started in a “dynamic” moment, as it could be
the first time in which the user exercises that right over the resource.
For example: A user can play a certain song so many times as he wants, but
only five days after the first time he played it.
Comment 3
It could be interesting to consider if it is necessary to include rules in
ODRL 2.0 (or if this is only an implementation issue) about how to handle
identification of the original creator of a work. One example could be to
restrict the use of specific rights, such as Adapt or Create, based on the
use of this information (for example, by forcing to include the
identification of the orginal creator in the new resource).
Comment 4
Include an ODRL representation in RDF; i.e., a better specification of the
ODRL semantics could be achieved by using ontologies simply expressed in RDF.
Based on our current work on ODRL and MPEG-21 ontologies generated from the
original XMLSchemas, we include an example to show how this ODRL-RDF
mapping could work. We present first an XML version, and then its RDF
equivalent. It should be mentioned that this RDF has been generated
automatically. Finally, a graphical view of the RDF tree is given.
The RDF graph represents the same tree as the XML specification, but it
also includes information about the complexTypes of the XMLSchema. In this
way, ontologies and rule languages (such as RuleML or SWRL ) could be used
to define the semantics of the language (one of your requirements) in an
easily implementable way.
Example XML specification
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<o-ex:rights xmlns:o-ex="http://odrl.net/1.1/ODRL-EX"
xmlns:o-dd="http://odrl.net/1.1/ODRL-DD"
xmlns:mpeg7="urn:mpeg:mpeg7:schema:2001">
<o-ex:context>
<o-dd:uid>doi:/voucher/383838383</o-dd:uid>
<o-dd:name>The Voucher for XML: The Movie</o-dd:name>
<o-dd:dLocation>http://example.com/odrl/383838383.xml</o-dd:dLocation>
</o-ex:context>
<o-ex:offer>
<o-ex:asset>
<o-ex:context>
<o-dd:uid>doi:0.9999999/video/383838383</o-dd:uid>
<o-dd:name>XML: The Movie</o-dd:name>
</o-ex:context>
</o-ex:asset>
<o-ex:party>
<o-ex:context>
<o-dd:uid>x500:c=IT;o=Registry;cn=MassimoCanale</o-dd:uid>
</o-ex:context>
<o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-dd:percentage>75</o-dd:percentage>
</o-ex:rightsholder>
</o-ex:party>
<o-ex:party>
<o-ex:context>
<o-dd:uid>x500:c=IT;o=Registry;cn=SimonaCanale</o-dd:uid>
</o-ex:context>
<o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-dd:percentage>25</o-dd:percentage>
</o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-ex:party>
<o-ex:context>
<o-dd:uid>x500:c=IT;o=Registry;cn=MariaCanale</o-dd:uid>
</o-ex:context>
<o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-dd:percentage>10</o-dd:percentage>
</o-ex:rightsholder>
</o-ex:party>
</o-ex:party>
<o-ex:permission>
<o-dd:play>
<o-ex:constraint>
<o-dd:quality o-ex:type="mpeg7:resolution">
<o-ex:constraint>
<o-dd:range>
<o-dd:max>30</o-dd:max>
</o-dd:range>
</o-ex:constraint>
</o-dd:quality>
</o-ex:constraint>
<o-ex:requirement>
<o-dd:peruse>
<o-dd:payment>
<o-dd:amount o-dd:currency="ITL">1000.00 </o-dd:amount>
</o-dd:payment>
</o-dd:peruse>
</o-ex:requirement>
</o-dd:play>
<o-dd:play>
<o-ex:constraint>
<o-dd:quality o-ex:type="mpeg7:resolution">
<o-ex:constraint>
<o-dd:range>
<o-dd:max>90.0</o-dd:max>
</o-dd:range>
</o-ex:constraint>
</o-dd:quality>
</o-ex:constraint>
<o-ex:requirement>
<o-dd:peruse>
<o-dd:payment>
<o-dd:amount o-dd:currency="ITL">5000.00 </o-dd:amount>
</o-dd:payment>
</o-dd:peruse>
</o-ex:requirement>
</o-dd:play>
</o-ex:permission>
</o-ex:offer>
</o-ex:rights>
Example equivalent RDF specification
<!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF [
<!ENTITY o-ex 'http://dmag.upf.edu/ontologies/2004/10/ODRL-EX-11.owl#'>
<!ENTITY o-dd 'http://dmag.upf.edu/ontologies/2004/10/ODRL-DD-11.owl#'>]>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:mpeg7="http://dmag.upf.edu/ontologies/2004/09/Mpeg7-2001.owl#"
xmlns:o-ex="&o-ex;" xmlns:o-dd="&o-dd;">
<o-ex:rightsType
rdf:about="http://dmag.upf.edu/ontologies/odrlontos/video-scenario1.xml">
<o-ex:offer>
<o-ex:offerAgreeType>
<o-ex:permission>
<o-ex:permissionType>
<o-dd:play>
<o-ex:permissionType>
<o-ex:requirement>
<o-ex:requirementType>
<o-dd:peruse>
<o-dd:feeType>
<o-dd:payment rdf:parseType="Resource">
<o-dd:amount>5000.00</o-dd:amount>
</o-dd:payment>
</o-dd:feeType>
</o-dd:peruse>
</o-ex:requirementType>
</o-ex:requirement>
<o-ex:constraint>
<o-ex:constraintType>
<o-dd:quality>
<mpeg7:resolution>
<o-ex:constraint>
<o-ex:constraintType>
<o-dd:range rdf:parseType="Resource">
<o-dd:max>90.0</o-dd:max>
</o-dd:range>
</o-ex:constraintType>
</o-ex:constraint>
<rdf:type rdf:resource= "&o-ex;constraintType"/>
</mpeg7:resolution>
</o-dd:quality>
</o-ex:constraintType>
</o-ex:constraint>
</o-ex:permissionType>
</o-dd:play>
<o-dd:play>
<o-ex:permissionType>
<o-ex:requirement>
<o-ex:requirementType>
<o-dd:peruse>
<o-dd:feeType>
<o-dd:payment rdf:parseType="Resource">
<o-dd:amount>1000.00</o-dd:amount>
</o-dd:payment>
</o-dd:feeType>
</o-dd:peruse>
</o-ex:requirementType>
</o-ex:requirement>
<o-ex:constraint>
<o-ex:constraintType>
<o-dd:quality>
<mpeg7:resolution>
<o-ex:constraint>
<o-ex:constraintType>
<o-dd:range rdf:parseType="Resource">
<o-dd:max>30</o-dd:max>
</o-dd:range>
</o-ex:constraintType>
</o-ex:constraint>
<rdf:type rdf:resource="&o-ex;constraintType"/>
</mpeg7:resolution>
</o-dd:quality>
</o-ex:constraintType>
</o-ex:constraint>
</o-ex:permissionType>
</o-dd:play>
</o-ex:permissionType>
</o-ex:permission>
<o-ex:party>
<o-ex:partyType>
<o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-ex:rightsHolderType>
<o-dd:percentage>75</o-dd:percentage>
</o-ex:rightsHolderType>
</o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-ex:context>
<o-ex:contextType>
<o-dd:uid>x500:c=IT;o=Registry;cn=MassimoCanale</o-dd:uid>
</o-ex:contextType>
</o-ex:context>
</o-ex:partyType>
</o-ex:party>
<o-ex:asset>
<o-ex:assetType>
<o-ex:context>
<o-ex:contextType>
<o-dd:name>XML: The Movie</o-dd:name>
<o-dd:uid>doi:0.9999999/video/383838383</o-dd:uid>
</o-ex:contextType>
</o-ex:context>
</o-ex:assetType>
</o-ex:asset>
<o-ex:party>
<o-ex:partyType>
<o-ex:party>
<o-ex:partyType>
<o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-ex:rightsHolderType>
<o-dd:percentage>10</o-dd:percentage>
</o-ex:rightsHolderType>
</o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-ex:context>
<o-ex:contextType>
<o-dd:uid>x500:c=IT;o=Registry;cn=MariaCanale</o-dd:uid>
</o-ex:contextType>
</o-ex:context>
</o-ex:partyType>
</o-ex:party>
<o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-ex:rightsHolderType>
<o-dd:percentage>25</o-dd:percentage>
</o-ex:rightsHolderType>
</o-ex:rightsholder>
<o-ex:context>
<o-ex:contextType>
<o-dd:uid>x500:c=IT;o=Registry;cn=SimonaCanale</o-dd:uid>
</o-ex:contextType>
</o-ex:context>
</o-ex:partyType>
</o-ex:party>
</o-ex:offerAgreeType>
</o-ex:offer>
<o-ex:context>
<o-ex:contextType>
<o-dd:name>The Voucher for XML: The Movie</o-dd:name>
<o-dd:dLocation>http://example.com/odrl/383838383.xml</o-dd:dLocation>
<o-dd:uid>doi:/voucher/383838383</o-dd:uid>
</o-ex:contextType>
</o-ex:context>
</o-ex:rightsType>
</rdf:RDF>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: DMAGCommentsODRL2-0RequirementsNov04.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 167936 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.odrl.net/pipermail/odrl-version2/attachments/20041110/7917f82e/DMAGCommentsODRL2-0RequirementsNov04.doc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: video-scenario.rdf.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 142335 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.odrl.net/pipermail/odrl-version2/attachments/20041110/7917f82e/video-scenario.rdf.jpg
More information about the Odrl-version2
mailing list