See also: IRC log
<renato> ivan...will u join us on the call?
<phila> scribe: james
<renato> https://www.w3.org/2016/04/11-poe-minutes
getting a lot of noise
<phila> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160418
<jo> scribe: james
RESOLUTION: Accepted last week's minutes
<michaelS> +1
<renato> https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases
First item: use cases
<phila> renato: We have 3 use cass so far, more are promised
Use cases from victor and phil
Renato: Going to look at use cases in more detail
<phila> ivan: There is a group related to this in the BSIG
<phila> ... mainly US-based industrial get together of the publishing world. They have a group on rights, rights management etc.
<phila> ... they promised me that they'd come with some use cases
Ivan: BISG book publishing world,
Ivan has been talking to regarding use cases, hopefully
something will be forthcoming.
... would be good if one of their members joined this group
thanks
<michaelS> https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases
<michaelS> http://w3c.github.io/poe/ucr/
michaelS: discusses workflow for requirements
renato: if deliverable, needs to
end up in Github. Wiki is good for scratch area.
... working group can decide what it prefers
<Zakim> jo, you wanted to comment on editorial role/process
<ivan> +1 to Jo
<phila> Jo is correct
jo: feel that its upto the Editor. Role of Editor is to gather the requirements by any means and with consensus with group. Editor to find methodology, as long as the group can work along
<phila> +1 to what Jo is saying
<phila> Again, +1 to Jo
renato: Formal note, or happy editing wiki?
jo: formal note preferred
simonstey: important to have a formal note
<benws> +1 to jo and Simon
<phila> And it's in the charter https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/charter#deliverables
phila: There is wriggle room, this first draft could be a primer. But thinks we need formal note, cite where they came from if possible. Trail is useful, feeds into requirements verification.
<phila> UC 01
michaelS: What is meant by standard license?
victor: a templated offer
<Zakim> phila, you wanted to ask about cascading licenses
michaelS: so cc for example, is this template or not.
phila: cascading license, akin to CSS where you change just a couple of necessary values
victor: yes.
phila: is this a machine inherited thing, or just filling in gaps
victor: simple
... simple process, just fill in blanks rather
<phila> james: CC weas mentioned earlier, how a single licence (policy cf offer)
<phila> james: An offer would be a set if permissions and obligations, which is transacted upon and turned into an agreement.
<phila> ... CC is broader, not sure how that fits in. I know there is a CC profile in ODRL
<phila> victor: Not I understood the question correctly. Why is the ODRL profile not sufficient?
<phila> james: It may be, but the workflow we have at the moment is that the offer is transformed into an agreement. I wonder whether we need to be clearer about the terminology
<phila> james: People think in terms of an open statement, then thare the offers that you need to agree to before processding.
<phila> ... Could be one worflow or multiple ines
<phila> victor: Not thought about that. We have software that writes ODRL agreements, they could perhaps be digitally signed
<phila> benws: Surely an offer becomes an agreement after it's signed?
<phila> james: That's what we're working with in our workflow
<phila> benws: Might be worth asking the WG - if you want something legally binding, it has to be through an agreement.
<james_> sorry dropped out
<james_> smyles: asked question: editor missed this
<james_> victor: could not express everything.. ?
<james_> smyles: payment varying may be outside of ODRL
<james_> jo: Are we assuming POE is for announcing permission and obligations, or a negotiation system
<james_> Templates are useful and powerful, but stepping into realm of negotiation system, and do we have an appetite or not?
<james_> renato: we did look into this many years ago (negotiation).
<james_> renato: ... previously negotiation was offline and spec did not go into the details.
<victor> I have stopped hearing Phil. Is it only me?
<benws> I hear him
<renato> Phil is loud and clear
<victor> ok. i hear again. thanks.
<james_> phila: The discussion of legal enforcement goes beyond our remit. It does not mean what is expressed with the output of this group can not be used to do just that.
<james_> phila: Legal stuff is a different level, and probably beyond our skill set .. Legal.
<james_> michaelS: For online news, implicit agreement necessary, otherwise too slow for such a use case
<james_> jo: Its made clear Legal Enforcement is out of scope. But what are we trying to achieve, can we make it clearer.
<james_> jo: Are we broadcasting the statements, or is the basis of negotiation and bi-party agreements
<jo> is it possible to have an exchange of the form:
<jo> "Dear Pig, are you willing to sell for one shilling Your ring?"
<jo> Said the Piggy, "I will."
<jo> http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-and-poets/poems/detail/43188
<james_> phila: Keep the legal out of spec, T&C's are on top,
<james_> renato: Implementations can layer the legal agreements on top
<james_> benws: Is it keep the legal out of spec, or keep Enforcement out of spec?
<simonstey> doesn't the precise meaning of "legally binding" also depend on individual countries (their legislations) ?
<james_> phila: Is the charter clear enough, the boundary on where we tread.
<james_> renato: Can use cases flush out the boundaries, we can pick and choose which ones we cover and do not.
<phila> +1 to detailed user cases
<james_> benws: Use case also help clarify what we are building as per Jo's question
<Sabrina> +1 to Renato's suggestion to wait until we have uses cases
<james_> renato: We need more detail on Use Case 01 particularly on the Abilities listed
<james_> renato: Victor are you able to give more details?
<james_> victor: yes
<james_> michaelS: How could we communicate about use cases between calls?
<renato> ACTION: victor add more example Use Cases for POE.UC.01 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/04/18-poe-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-8 - Add more example use cases for poe.uc.01 [on Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel - due 2016-04-25].
<victor> +1 to michael
<james_> renato: emails on community list
<james_> renato: We will continue with some more use case analysis next week
<renato> https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Requirements
<james_> renato: How do we go about actually analysing requirements
<james_> renato: on actions, all to do with use cases
<james_> renato: need more use cases, please submit, hopefully by end of this month
<james_> renato: AIB?
<james_> renato: AOB
<james_> renato: meeting closed
<james_> thanks all