[Odrl-version2] resumption of containers & model update

[Alapan Arnab]

Hi,
> 1.) Containers
I like your approach and I think it makes a lot of sense. There is a
need to define interpretation of containers in this case though as the
license in your example could be interpreted as:
The user is allowed permission A with constraints (X) and (Y) and (X or
Y)
which is not necessarily what you mean.
> 4.) 
> 
> What do you guys think of removing the rights-expression-type level and
> instead using an attribute "TYPE" in rights to specify the semantics of the
> actual rights expression?
> 
> I have a problem with different hierarchies of RE elements, like in alapans
> approach - simply for negotiation. If somebody wants to use ODRL without the
> negotiation part, then the hierarchies do not make sense at all. An aim
> should really be to keep the negotiation part independent of the remaining
> model. 
I think this problem arose because I tried to retain as much of the old
model as possible. But your model is very close to my last model so I
think we are close to agreement on most of the issues in this regard.
> If a RE grants next rights, for example, then these nextrights have to be
> defined in a new rights expressed. RE ids would have to link the various
> rights expressions. This would have the advantage that a "nextRight" could
> more easily become part of a new agreement (I think).
> 
In your model I think it will work. I do have some reservations with
regards to validity checking in XML implementations though.

Regards
Alapan
-- 
Alapan Arnab
Data Networks Architecture (DNA) Laboratory
Department of Computer Science
University of Cape Town
Rondebosch, 7700
South Africa

Tel: +27 21 650 3127
Web: http://people.cs.uct.ac.za/~aarnab/
Blog: http://idiots-mind.blogspot.com
----------
"You must always believe that you can be the best, but you must never
believe you have achieved it".
Juan Manuel Fangio