Where should the copyright go

I think there may be an issue as to where the copyright details go in implementations of ADL2/AOM2.

Looking at AOM2 the RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION_ITEM class is as follows:

The ADL2 spec correlates to this with

Yet in both the Archie plugin and the CKM ADL2 implementation, the following appears



It seems to be that the presence of ‘copyright’ here is incorrect, it should be an entry in the ‘other_details’ dictionary.

The fact that both CKM and archie have implemented it the same way is causing me to question my understanding of the specifications - where should the ‘copyright’ data go?

Hi Richard,

CKM uses Archie for conversion to ADL2 here, so the congruency doesn’t mean much.

It seems that the Base [adl2] component’s RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION has the copyright element, whereas in the Common IM it is part of the RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION_ITEM (i.e. for each language in adl 1.4).


From memory, this was an intentional change.

Well that explains why they are so closely in step with each other :slight_smile:

It’s not my intention to challenge the decision, just the consequences of it.
In ADL1.4/AOM1.4 there can be multiple ‘copyright’ values, one per language (1 per RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION_ITEM)
In ADL2/AOM2 there is a single ‘copyright’ in RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION

As a consequence, converting between AOM1.4 and AOM2, I am assuming the following:

  • The ‘copyright’ in RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION is unpopulated (unless other_details in the same class had a value keyed appropriately)
  • Each of the ‘copyright’ values in RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION_ITEM moves to other_details in the same class with ‘copyright’ as the key.

The ADL2 output from Archie has a defect as there is no copyright in RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION_ITEM

Furthermore, the reference model at Common Information Model does not seem to be in alignment with AOM2 and possibly needs to be updated.

ADL2 uses the BASE component Resource model. ADL1.4 is stuck with the older one unfortunately.

Thanks @thomas.beale the point I was attempting to make is that the ADL2 representation from Archie does not follow the ADL2 specification.

As a general point, the relationship between the specifications with respect to those applicable to ADL1.4 vs ADL2 and AOM1.4 vs AOM2 is possibly not as clear as it could be. I suspect those that have seen the evolution to ADL2 have a good grasp on it, but for those picking it up in its current state, it is very easy to get lost.

1 Like