W3C

Permissions and Obligations Expression Working Group Teleconference

01 Aug 2016

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
renato, Ben, CarolineB, sabrina, ivan
Regrets
Michael, Phil, Stuart, Victor
Chair
Ben
Scribe
sabrina

Contents


<renato> trackbot, start meeting

<renato> http://w3c.github.io/poe/ucr/

<renato> Scribe: sabrina

1st action is to approve last weeks minutes

<renato> +1

<benws2> +1

+1

<CarolineB> +1

minutes are approved

Ben has a quick question on the use case requirements document. Ben to update the document t week. Ben would like to work with Steward to focus on new requirements

If there are requirements that are already fulfilled can either comment or remove

Renato suggests that we focus on documenting new requirements

Trying to solve sound quality issues.... Ben to call in again...

Moving on to the use cases:

We start by looking at 10-16

<renato> UC.10 https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#payByUse

Vocabulary question

Ben: Should we introduce the concept unit of count?

Renato looking for a pay per use example

Simple requirement is to support pay for use scenarios

<renato> UC.11 https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#thirdParty

UC.11 there are a number of roles that appear e.g. contracting party, acknowledging party uld these be include specifically

<renato> Current roles: http://w3c.github.io/poe/vocab/#partyRoles

Should we take into account opposites compensating party and compensated party

<renato> UC.12 https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#tracingPerm

Action Ben to provide a list

<trackbot> Created ACTION-20 - Provide a list [on Benedict Whittam Smith - due 2016-08-08].

UC.12 What about deriving policies.... for two different datasets that are combined to create

Ivan: The problem is that can be an endless fit.....

What do you mean by deriving a new dataset?

Associate original policy with a subset of the derived dataset

Caroline: Won't it vary from company to company

Ben: In RDF ODRL is based on Deontic logical

<renato> Sabrina: formal semantics deliverable can be used for this

Ivan: Reasoning on the combined policy
... We should not aim at covering this whole area....

There might be cases that require considerable research

Ivan: We should not set the expectation that we will satisfy all requirements
... It is not clear what we will do in terms of the formal semantics
... Stop at OWL2

<renato> UC.13 https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#delegation

Action Sabrina to speak to Ben on this use case

<trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - Speak to ben on this use case [on Sabrina Kirrane - due 2016-08-08].

UC.13 Delegation of an assignment

Renato: Would this be a new policy type

Delegation could be a policy type

Sabrina: What about revoking?

Ben: Can't we just cancel the policy
... Lots of stuff around versioning that has come up in the requirements

Caroline: Can't we end a Policy?

Renato: How is managed at the moment is we know when the end date will be - using constraints

Used to be in ODRL 1.1 but it was removed because it was not used

Ben: I don't think it is a change to the model

We could just use provenance and maybe valid from

Ben: Use case people need to go through the use cases to check for the need for versioning

<renato> UC.14 https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#voteExtendedRel

<scribe> ACTION: for Ben to speak with Sabrina regarding versioning, delegation and provenance [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/08/01-poe-irc]

<trackbot> Error finding 'for'. You can review and register nicknames at e/track/users>.

Renato: Points to the section on extended relations

<renato> http://w3c.github.io/poe/model/#extended-relations

i.e. boolean operations

Renato: It was taken out as it was too complex. Might be easier in RDF. We need to check that

It was left in so that we could get feedback from the community

This could mean a new requirement

<renato> UC.15 https://www.w3.org/TR/poe-ucr/#realDelay

UC.15 Realtime versus delayed data

Using realtime data is usually much more expensive and restrictive

Ivan: e.g. Stock Exchange data

Renato: Perhaps they could have different IRI's

Ben: Example of using an asset after a 15 minute delay could cost less

Ivan: Similar use cases may come from the IOT

It would be good to have an idea how this is done in practice

If two different IRI's are used then it is not a problem for ODRL

Ben: Both two feeds and one feed are used in practice

Ivan: Two conditional assignments - we have to consider the slightly more general case

Ben: The ODRL model supports this already, however we don't have the vocabulary. Therefore nclude add these new terms

<renato> UC.16 https://w3c.github.io/poe/ucr/#horizontalData

As it is also important for IoT we should consider it as a new requirement

UC.16 Accessing Historical Data - how is it packaged - access interval and access period

Renato: ODRL does not know that the asset is from the past

Ben: example where there is a need to access historical data...

Requirement here is for new vocab terms

Sabrina: When it comes to policies provenance and temporal information usually go hand in hand....

Renato: Propose it as a requirement and look into it....

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: for Ben to speak with Sabrina regarding versioning, delegation and provenance [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/08/01-poe-irc]
 

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.143 (CVS log)
    $Date: 2016/08/01 13:11:56 $