License not found

[o314]

Hello BuildingSmart,

I can not see any mention of the license of those documents.

Is there any mention somewhere precising these conditions ?
Or could you add them accordingly to your policies ?

Thanks a lot

PS this may help https://help.github.com/articles/licensing-a-repository/

[o314]

(replying to myself)

IfcOwl v4_add2 is CC BY 3.0.
One can assume same license apply there...

Would be better if officially confirmed

[pipauwel]

A license was included in the ontology files themselves, namely the CC-BY3.0. I'll add it also for the full repository. I don't know what the license model of IFC itself is.

…

________________________________ Van: Olivier <[email protected]> Verzonden: vrijdag 29 juni 2018 23:03 Aan: buildingSMART/ifcOWL CC: Subscribed Onderwerp: Re: [buildingSMART/ifcOWL] License not found (#3) (replying to myself) IfcOwl v4_add2<http://ifcowl.openbimstandards.org/IFC4_ADD2/index.html> is CC BY 3.0<https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/>. One can assume same license apply there... Would be better if officially confirmed - You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#3 (comment)>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABjr0pWm0jKO3JYW0XtjUqH9rwVjf4CDks5uBpYagaJpZM4U7fQQ>.

[pipauwel]

Hi again, In fact, GitHub does not naturally include CC-BY, mainly because this license type is not commonly associated to code. We can use CC-BY, but it may be better to just change the license type. Alternative license types are: - Apache License v2.0 - MIT - GNU GPL v3.0. I don't really mind which one of these three is picked. I know that the converter code uses Apache License v2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0?), so I am favor of using that one here as well. But this should in principle be aligned with the entire buildingSMART license model. Thomas, do you have any idea about that one? kind regards, Pieter

…

________________________________ Van: Pieter Pauwels Verzonden: maandag 2 juli 2018 14:34 Aan: buildingSMART/ifcOWL; buildingSMART/ifcOWL CC: Subscribed Onderwerp: Re: [buildingSMART/ifcOWL] License not found (#3) A license was included in the ontology files themselves, namely the CC-BY3.0. I'll add it also for the full repository. I don't know what the license model of IFC itself is.

________________________________ Van: Olivier <[email protected]> Verzonden: vrijdag 29 juni 2018 23:03 Aan: buildingSMART/ifcOWL CC: Subscribed Onderwerp: Re: [buildingSMART/ifcOWL] License not found (#3) (replying to myself) IfcOwl v4_add2<http://ifcowl.openbimstandards.org/IFC4_ADD2/index.html> is CC BY 3.0<https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/>. One can assume same license apply there... Would be better if officially confirmed - You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#3 (comment)>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABjr0pWm0jKO3JYW0XtjUqH9rwVjf4CDks5uBpYagaJpZM4U7fQQ>.

[o314]

Thanks for your answer. AFAIK today, the 'connected structure' is mainly under CC-BY 3.0.

There is one important missing point however.
The description of the entity definition (and attribute definition too) is present in the historical ifc html document but not in the owl one.

It's a bit disappointing one can not explain ifc element in natural language to business people without having to worry about license.

Otherwise, the cc by is perfectly fine.