11:57:08 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #poe
11:57:08 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/08/22-poe-irc
11:57:10 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
11:57:10 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #poe
11:57:12 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
11:57:12 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
11:57:13 <trackbot> Meeting: Permissions and Obligations Expression Working Group Teleconference
11:57:13 <trackbot> Date: 22 August 2016
11:57:30 <renato> RRSAgent, make logs public
11:57:48 <renato> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160822
11:58:01 <renato> present+ renato
11:58:13 <renato> chair: renato
11:58:24 <renato> Regrets: James, Ben, Victor
11:59:49 <michaelS> michaelS has joined #poe
12:00:07 <michaelS> present+
12:00:15 <ivan> Present+
12:00:24 <simonstey> simonstey has joined #poe
12:00:40 <Serena> Serena has joined #poe
12:02:02 <phila> present+ phila, Serena, michaelS
12:02:31 <phila> phila has changed the topic to: Agenda for 2016-08-15: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160822
12:02:34 <simonstey> present+
12:02:55 <smyles> smyles has joined #poe
12:03:03 <smyles> present+
12:03:35 <renato> Scribe volunteers: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Scribes
12:04:12 <phila> scribe: michaelS
12:04:26 <phila> scribeNick: michaelS
12:05:04 <sabrina> sabrina has joined #poe
12:05:12 <sabrina> present+ sabrina
12:05:15 <michaelS> TOPIC minutes last call - 8 August 2016
12:05:18 <renato> approve minutes: last meeting minutes
12:05:30 <renato> https://www.w3.org/2016/08/08-poe-minutes
12:05:44 <phila> scribe: phila
12:05:48 <phila> scribeNick: phila
12:05:54 <phila> +0 (not present
12:06:06 <phila> resolution: Minutes of 8 August arrpoved
12:06:12 <phila> Topic: UCR
12:06:33 <phila> renato: We've been going through these for the last few weeks and trying to work out what the reqs would be from them.
12:06:42 <phila> ... There are 4 sets of UCs left
12:06:43 <CarolineB> CarolineB has joined #poe
12:06:52 <Brian_Ulicny> Brian_Ulicny has joined #poe
12:06:52 <phila> ... One from Mo, 3 from phila, one from James
12:06:54 <CarolineB> present+ CarolineB
12:07:02 <Brian_Ulicny> present+
12:07:15 <phila> ... Only Phil is here so we need to talk about those
12:07:20 <Brian_Ulicny> Has the Webex info changed?  I can't log in.
12:07:38 <michaelS> scribe: michaelS
12:07:44 <renato> UC.03
12:07:45 <renato> https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#embargoedDataset
12:08:00 <michaelS> Topic: UC.03
12:08:01 <Brian_Ulicny> Says meeting is canceled on Webex using old link.
12:08:31 <michaelS> phila: outlined the use case
12:08:31 <renato> Brian...click on link from here: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160822
12:09:54 <michaelS> ... I publish my data now and make it available under a new policy a specific period later
12:10:25 <renato> https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#relTimeConstraint
12:10:35 <smyles> q+
12:10:49 <michaelS> ... the dates are relative dates, relative to the date of a first publishing
12:11:32 <simonstey> +q
12:11:57 <michaelS> smyles: will the data be published now and the future date be added
12:11:59 <michaelS> p
12:12:27 <michaelS> phila: the future date will be added as an intention, not as strict statement
12:12:33 <simonstey> -q
12:12:45 <smyles> q-
12:13:06 <michaelS> smyles: a news embargo is different: the permission to publish later is added at the time of the initial publication
12:14:11 <michaelS> renato: this may relate to provenence considerations
12:15:17 <michaelS> phila: complex would be: a policy A expires on date 1 and a second policy B which starts on date 1+1.
12:15:28 <simonstey> +
12:15:29 <simonstey> +q
12:15:41 <michaelS> ... the first policy should not be stricly  related to policy B
12:16:42 <michaelS> simonstey: feels that can be solved this way: having a time constraint closing on date 1 and a permission starting on date 1 +1day, all in one policy
12:17:54 <michaelS> simonstey: a relative statement could be "the permission B gets active after constraint X has expired"
12:18:27 <simonstey> primer ;)
12:18:49 <michaelS> phila: sound interesting, will we explain somewhere that this can be done already with ODRL
12:19:15 <michaelS> ... such use cases should be documented somewhere - I need this for my project
12:19:19 <simonstey> +q
12:19:29 <simonstey> -q
12:19:36 <simonstey> +1 to renato's comment
12:20:11 <michaelS> Topic: UC.06
12:20:19 <renato> UC.06 https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#openPhacts
12:20:37 <michaelS> phila: explained the use case
12:22:17 <michaelS> ... all what OpenPHACTS does is making the user aware where the data come from and the source must be made explicit
12:22:49 <michaelS> q+
12:23:12 <simonstey> +q
12:23:30 <michaelS> ... his concern is about merging policies about different data sources
12:24:10 <simonstey> -q
12:24:11 <michaelS> ... any combination should be made clear
12:24:39 <phila> michaelS: Each policy comes with an asset
12:24:50 <phila> ... Do we have something to establish relationships between assets
12:25:00 <phila> ... as a policy may relate to multiple assets
12:25:22 <phila> renato: We don't have a way of describing those relationships
12:25:32 <phila> ... they're outside the scope of ODRL at the moment
12:25:35 <michaelS> renato:  no, we don't have something for that purpose
12:26:31 <smyles> q+
12:26:39 <michaelS> q-
12:27:17 <michaelS> smyles: the UC has more to do how we want to merge different policies
12:27:31 <michaelS> ... what are the rules for processing multiple policies
12:28:49 <michaelS> phila: We have to expose what the original asset creators had defined
12:29:35 <michaelS> ... e.g. three sources provide images and they are licensed as a package.
12:30:00 <michaelS> ... and a combined policy is applied to the package
12:30:21 <michaelS> q+
12:30:51 <michaelS> q-
12:30:52 <smyles> q-
12:31:07 <phila> michaelS: That raises the question of where are the rules appluies for combining policies?
12:31:21 <phila> ... What Stuart said is how should this be processed on the receiver says
12:31:35 <phila> ... Phil says there might be a package with a combined policy.#
12:31:54 <phila> ... I think there should be a set of policies or a combined policy. If there is a combined one then no more needs to be said.
12:32:08 <sabrina> q+
12:32:08 <phila> ... the party that creates the combined policy takes the risk of merging it correctly.
12:32:12 <michaelS> q-
12:33:03 <michaelS> renato: a merged policy may point at the original policies
12:33:43 <michaelS> phila: this is more a provenance issue than a POE issue
12:34:33 <michaelS> sabrina: This reminded her of other use cases: if multiple data sets are added to a new asset the original policies should be trackable
12:35:47 <Brian_Ulicny> I agree with Sabrina: provenance and time are very important for real world permissions.
12:35:50 <michaelS> ... the merged policies should have temporal constraints and governance data
12:37:01 <michaelS> phila: agreed to Sabrina: these two facets should be discussed, either clarified or added for ODRL
12:37:16 <michaelS> renato: will keep track of that
12:37:34 <michaelS> Topic: UC.08
12:37:43 <renato> https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#atomicLicense
12:38:03 <michaelS> phila: Explained the UC in detail
12:39:28 <sabrina> q+
12:40:14 <michaelS> sabrina: Simon and she are working in this area
12:40:31 <phila> ack s
12:40:39 <michaelS> phila: looks forward to discuss that UC with them on 30 September in Vienna
12:41:43 <michaelS> ... hope to get more specific requirements - coming then back to ODRL
12:42:06 <phila> Topic: Actual Requirements
12:42:07 <michaelS> renato: No more contributors of UCs are present at this call
12:42:18 <michaelS> yes
12:42:25 <phila> renato: We want to get the reqs into the wiki
12:42:37 <phila> ... Ben was working on this - did he talk to you, Simon?
12:42:38 <simonstey> no /:
12:42:46 <simonstey> but I can take over
12:42:52 <phila> michaelS: What was he working on exactly?
12:43:07 <phila> renato: We've talked about draft reqs, we've captured a few of them in the minutes
12:43:19 <phila> ... that misses a lot of the context. We want to document the requirements in the UCS
12:43:24 <phila> s/UCS/UCR/
12:43:31 <phila> ... So we can discuss and agree/not on them
12:43:40 <phila> michaelS: So the wiki requirements is the initial target
12:43:47 <phila> renato: Yes, not the ED just yet
12:44:01 <phila> michaelS: I've checked, this doc hasn't cvhanged since 23 June
12:44:22 <phila> s/cvh/ch/
12:44:43 <phila> renato: So we can maybe go back and look for these
12:45:24 <phila> ... What I'll do then is go through tle most recent meetins and note the discussion and note the consensus on what the res were
12:45:51 <phila> s/res were/reqs were/
12:46:03 <phila> renato: Any otehr commnets on use cases and requirements?
12:46:14 <phila> [None]
12:46:20 <phila> Topic: Issues and Actions
12:46:25 <phila> renato: No new ones recently
12:48:22 <phila> phila: Have his reasons for not being able to complete action-12
12:48:25 <phila> close action-12
12:48:26 <trackbot> Closed action-12.
12:48:49 <phila> sabrina: I spoke to Ben last week and the end result is that I'll be at TPAC
12:49:09 <phila> renato: Any change needed to UC 12?
12:49:23 <phila> sabrina: No, I think it's all about the provenance aspect we were talking about earlier
12:49:40 <phila> ... So I think TPAC is the place for this, So we can close that action
12:49:44 <phila> close action-21
12:49:44 <trackbot> Closed action-21.
12:50:00 <phila> Topic: AOB
12:50:12 <phila> renato: We have a draft agenda for TPAC
12:50:15 <renato> TPAC agenda
12:50:15 <renato> https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:TPAC2016
12:50:26 <phila> ... Any comments on that?
12:50:37 <phila> ... We have prov on the agenda coming from today.
12:50:46 <phila> ... BAsic plan is to go through the requirements on day 1
12:50:53 <phila> ... So clear underdstanding about changes to be made
12:51:09 <phila> ... And any other new work that we haven't covered yet?
12:51:21 <phila> .. Things like formal semantics, primer, common licneces
12:51:35 <phila> ... And then Friday more about actual design choices.
12:51:45 <phila> renato: So that's the rough break down
12:52:02 <phila> ... Also note that the Digital Publishing IG wants to join us on Friday to present their use cases.
12:52:12 <phila> ... Includes news from BSIG
12:52:20 <phila> ... I'm giving a talk to them on Tuesday on POE
12:52:27 <phila> ... Might get some new UCs from that
12:52:48 <phila> phila: It's only 4 weeks ...
12:53:03 <phila> q+
12:53:07 <phila> ack p
12:53:38 <phila> phila: When might there be noew publications after TPAC?
12:54:13 <phila> michaelS: Next milestone is LCCR in April
12:54:21 <phila> phila: That means you're finished :-)
12:54:36 <phila> renato: If we leave Lisbon with clarity then...
12:54:53 <phila> ... 2 months for the first iteration of changes
12:54:57 <phila> ... so end Nov
12:55:43 <phila> phila: Then with another iteration in, say Feb, that gets you to LCCR in April
12:56:25 <phila> renato: If no more commnets on TPAC - any other OB?
12:56:41 <phila> [None]
12:56:48 <phila> renato: So we'll close the meeting there
12:56:52 <phila> ... Thanks everyone
12:57:07 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
12:57:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/08/22-poe-minutes.html phila
12:57:18 <Serena> Serena has left #poe
12:58:24 <phila> s/renato: We want to get the reqs into the wiki/scribe: phila
12:59:14 <phila> s/renato: We've talked about draft reqs, we've captured a few of them in the minutes/renato: We've talked about draft reqs, we've captured a few of them in the minutes, we want to get the reqs into the wiki/
12:59:17 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
12:59:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/08/22-poe-minutes.html phila
14:35:50 <benws4> benws4 has joined #poe
14:59:22 <Zakim> Zakim has left #poe
16:18:54 <phila> phila has joined #poe
16:20:10 <phila> phila has joined #poe
16:27:49 <phila_> phila_ has joined #poe
16:50:18 <phila> phila has joined #poe