VocInVO2: Desise change, License

[Markus Demleitner]

Dear Colleagues,

Last week, I had threatened two changes to the vocabulary repository,
and since there was no major outcry, I've gone ahead and implemented
them, namely:

On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 11:36:00AM +0200, Markus Demleitner wrote:
> (1) desise change.  First implementor feedback (thanks, Mark!) was
> that the terms dictionary in desise could be made more
> self-documenting by moving the values from lists to dicts.  For
> [...]
> So, the proposal is to make this more explicit in this way:
> 
>   "terms": {
>     "EQUATORIAL": {
>       "label": "Equatorial",
>       "description": "Umbrella term of all equatorial frame.  Only use for old, pre-FK4 equatorial coordinates."
>     },

This is now how the desise in the RDF repo looks like.  This has the
advantage that people implementing against it will see the form that
I'd have liked to move to anyway, and they won't have to change code
when we do that later.

It has the downside that the current WD still has lists rather than
the dicts.  It's updated in volute, but I'd like to have a bit more
feedback before bothering the document coordinator with another WD.

Does anyone feel we should update the WD just about now?

> (2) As part of a reality check with other community standards
> (thanks, Carlo!) we've noticed that we've so far neglected declaring
> the license our vocabularies are distributed under (if any).  At the
> session, everyone either agreed to or was swayed by my arguments for
> using CC-0 (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/; yeah,
> I know, that doesn't count as a license in most jurisdictions, but it
> serves the purpose).

I've done that, too, after a fashion.  The index page,
http://www.ivoa.net/rdf/, now says in the small print:

  Unless specified otherwise on the vocabulary page, IVOA
  vocabularies and their metadata are made available under CC-0 by
  the IVOA Semantics Working Group.

The "unless specified otherwise" part is because the last WD forsees
external vocabularies that we have to distribute by their terms.  And
sure enough, the UAT is CC-BY-SA (there's still an issue with it that
I'll try to work out with the UAT folks).

On each vocabulary page, there's small print:

  This vocabulary is made available under CC-0 by the IVOA Semantics
  Working Group.

The RDF representations (turtle and RDF/XML) have the license
included in dc:license statements; desise doesn't have that (should
it?  I there a good convention to embed license information into
JSON?).

As usual, any feedback is welcome,

       Markus