transformation of dct:license

[NielsHoffmann]

This is an issues stemming from the GeoDCAT-AP 3.0.0 pilot.

We observe in the transformation that creative commons licensing is transformed to a dct:RightsStatement.

This is a snippet from a iso 19115 xml document that provides an inspire rightsStatement as well as a Creative Commons License:

<gmd:MD_LegalConstraints>
          <gmd:otherConstraints>
            <gmx:Anchor xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.nl">Naamsvermelding verplicht, Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed</gmx:Anchor>
          </gmd:otherConstraints>
          <gmd:otherConstraints>
            <gmx:Anchor xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/ConditionsApplyingToAccessAndUse/noConditionsApply">Er zijn geen condities voor toegang en gebruik</gmx:Anchor>
          </gmd:otherConstraints>
        </gmd:MD_LegalConstraints>

The transformation logic maps both of those snippets to a dct:accessRights Statement:

<dct:accessRights>
               <dct:RightsStatement rdf:about="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.nl"/>
            </dct:accessRights>
            <dct:accessRights>
               <dct:RightsStatement rdf:about="http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/ConditionsApplyingToAccessAndUse/noConditionsApply"/>
            </dct:accessRights>

The correct transformation should map the creative commons statement to a:

<dct:license>
            <dct:LicenseDocument rdf:about="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.nl"/>
          </dct:license>

[jakubklimek]

Could you specify, how the XSLT would recognize which of the gmd:otherConstraints is a RightsStatement and which is a LicenseDocument? Is there a recognized practice in INSPIRE regarding the distinction?

Ideally, it should be based on something else than parsing the URL and deciding based on the domain name or such.

[NielsHoffmann]

I'm afraid there is not a lot of other information to base the logic on other than the url.

The url's

• http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/LimitationsOnPublicAccess/noLimitations
• http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/ConditionsApplyingToAccessAndUse/noConditionsApply
  are inspire values that should be transformed into

<dct:accessRights>
               <dct:RightsStatement/>
</dct:accessRights>

All other url's should probably be transformed to license statements.

[cnlarsen]

I've also looked into this whole area a fair bit, and this is truly a rabbit hole.

First off, if you want a pragmatic solution, the mapping correctly transforms snippets such as the following (edited from my initial comment about 1h ago to provide an up to date example)

          <gmd:resourceConstraints>
            <gmd:MD_LegalConstraints>
              <gmd:useConstraints>
                <gmd:MD_RestrictionCode codeList="http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/resources/Codelists/cat/codelists.xml#MD_RestrictionCode" codeListValue="otherRestrictions"/>
              </gmd:useConstraints>
              <gmd:otherConstraints>
                <gmx:Anchor xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.da">CC BY 4.0</gmx:Anchor>
              </gmd:otherConstraints>
            </gmd:MD_LegalConstraints>
          </gmd:resourceConstraints>
          <gmd:resourceConstraints>
            <gmd:MD_LegalConstraints>
              <gmd:accessConstraints>
                <gmd:MD_RestrictionCode codeListValue="otherRestrictions" codeList="http://standards.iso.org/iso/19115/resources/Codelists/cat/codelists.xml#MD_RestrictionCode"/>
              </gmd:accessConstraints>
              <gmd:otherConstraints>
                <gmx:Anchor xlink:href="http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/LimitationsOnPublicAccess/noLimitations">No limitations on public access</gmx:Anchor>
              </gmd:otherConstraints>
            </gmd:MD_LegalConstraints>

into

            <dct:license>
               <dct:LicenseDocument rdf:about="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.da"/>
            </dct:license>
            <dct:accessRights>
               <dct:RightsStatement rdf:about="http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/metadata-codelist/LimitationsOnPublicAccess/noLimitations"/>
            </dct:accessRights>

Now, if this is in keeping with good practice for INSPIRE, I do not know.

However, the underlying issue, as I see it, that INSPIRE conflates access conditions and use conditions, and moreover that it has two different sections regulating the description of access conditions, the differences between which are not entirely clear to me.

Now, to get to the specific case that you're describing, and which we've dealth with ourselves (Denmark), my reading is that the presence of a CC-BY license means that mentioning "noConditionsApply" is superfluous or actually even wrong. Cf. the INSPIRE technical guidelines p. 55:

"If no conditions apply the gmd:otherConstraints shall include a gmx:Anchor element pointing to the value "noConditionsApply" in the code list ConditionsApplyingToAccessAndUse"

But the presence of CC-BY indicates that some conditions for use actually do apply, namely the requirement of attributing the source of the data. The guidelines continue:

In other cases gmd:otherConstraints shall include a Non-empty Free Text Element with a textual description of the conditions in the language of the metadata. This text shall include descriptions of terms and conditions, including where applicable, the corresponding fees or an URL pointing to an online resource where these terms and conditions are described.

I would think we are in such an other case, no?