12:12:30 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #poe
12:12:30 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/02/13-poe-irc
12:12:32 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:12:32 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #poe
12:12:34 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
12:12:34 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
12:12:35 <trackbot> Meeting: Permissions and Obligations Expression Working Group Teleconference
12:12:35 <trackbot> Date: 13 February 2017
12:12:39 <renato> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:12:46 <renato> present+ renato
12:12:57 <renato> Chair: renato
12:13:06 <renato> Regrets: Serena, Stuart, Ben
12:14:43 <simonstey> simonstey has joined #poe
12:28:29 <phila> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20170213
12:28:37 <michaelS> michaelS has joined #poe
12:30:36 <ivan> present+
12:30:50 <simonstey> present+
12:30:50 <phila> present+
12:31:27 <renato> Plenty of snow - just the 40 degree heat melts it on entry to our atmosphere :-)
12:32:41 <simonstey> scribe: simonstey
12:32:43 <victor> victor has joined #poe
12:33:24 <simonstey> chair: renato
12:33:27 <simonstey> TOPIC: approval of last week's minutes
12:33:42 <renato> https://www.w3.org/2017/02/06-poe-minutes.html
12:33:51 <michaelS> present+ michaelS
12:34:05 <simonstey> renato: hearing no objections -> minutes approved
12:34:28 <victor> present+ victor
12:34:30 <simonstey> TOPIC: 2 rec track documents
12:34:36 <CarolineB> CarolineB has joined #poe
12:34:58 <Sabrina> Sabrina has joined #poe
12:35:08 <Sabrina> present+ Sabrina
12:35:11 <simonstey> renato: comments from simonstey regarding introduction of attributes
12:35:13 <renato> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/
12:36:06 <simonstey> ... another issue discussed last week was json-ld context
12:36:33 <simonstey> ... got some advise/comments from gregg kellogg
12:37:10 <simonstey> ... has anyone any further questions/comments regarding the info model?
12:37:44 <renato> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/105
12:37:51 <simonstey> ... we plan to publish both documents as WD
12:39:14 <phila> simonstey: There are issues in the PDF that are implementation specific, they don't provide general info
12:39:34 <renato> simon: undefined actions section - http://w3c.github.io/poe/model/#undefined
12:39:56 <renato> simon: what is an undefined action? too vague?
12:40:52 <renato> ...implementation specific
12:41:46 <simonstey> renato: this feature was added way back
12:42:31 <phila> q+
12:42:32 <simonstey> ... when ODRL was used more in closed environments, rather than open world scenarios
12:42:40 <simonstey> ... I propose to mark it as "at risk"
12:43:11 <simonstey> phila: the phrase "at risk" has a specific conotation
12:43:25 <simonstey> ... I would mark it as issue
12:43:55 <phila> Sounds sensible to me
12:44:10 <phila> phila: Maybe also add a sentence to the Status of the Document
12:44:23 <CarolineB> present+ CarolineB
12:44:44 <renato> Proposal: mark section 3.1.4 as an issue - the feature maybe removed in future version
12:44:53 <simonstey> +1
12:44:58 <phila> +1
12:45:00 <ivan> +1
12:45:04 <Sabrina> +1
12:45:05 <michaelS> +1
12:45:06 <victor> +1
12:45:31 <renato> Resolved: mark section 3.1.4 as an issue - the feature maybe removed in future version
12:45:41 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
12:45:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/02/13-poe-minutes.html phila
12:46:05 <simonstey> renato: anyone has any other questions/comments reg. the info model?
12:46:41 <simonstey> phila: is that the only open issue?
12:47:05 <simonstey> renato: yes, other than that only editorial ones left
12:47:20 <simonstey> TOPIC: vocab document
12:47:44 <renato> http://w3c.github.io/poe/vocab/ODRL22.jsonld
12:48:01 <simonstey> renato: we now know how a json-ld context should actually look like
12:48:36 <simonstey> ... the only other issues for the vocab (apart from the json-ld) are a few little ones
12:48:43 <simonstey> ... 1) issue 101
12:48:44 <renato> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/101
12:49:14 <simonstey> ... there are 4 actions that all end with "to an audience"
12:50:02 <simonstey> ... I would like to propose removing the phrase "to an audience" from all 4
12:50:16 <michaelS> q+
12:50:22 <simonstey> ack phila
12:50:29 <phila> q+
12:50:34 <simonstey> ack michaelS
12:51:22 <simonstey> michaelS: adding this phrase was highly recommended by a big german law firm back then
12:51:35 <simonstey> q+
12:52:25 <simonstey> michaelS: there's a difference between "playing" for a small audience or a big one
12:52:26 <phila> q- later
12:53:11 <simonstey> renato: you might be giving away too much permission by having this phrase
12:53:13 <phila> regrets+ Brian
12:54:01 <simonstey> ... plus, we won't be able to have a "private" use version of play
12:54:16 <simonstey> michaelS: what would be a use case for that?
12:54:28 <simonstey> renato: [explaining a use case]
12:55:25 <simonstey> michaelS: maybe we need a new action?
12:55:36 <simonstey> q?
12:55:59 <phila> ack s
12:56:06 <phila> q-
12:57:13 <simonstey> michaelS: the assignee isn't necessarily the beneficiary of a permission
12:57:41 <simonstey> ... we could require the definition of a recipient
12:59:57 <simonstey> renato: if you explicitly mention "to an audience", it implies that you have the right to publicly play it to an audience
13:00:41 <simonstey> michaelS: there should be a distinction between private&public use
13:01:06 <simonstey> renato: most of the action can only be performed by the assignee
13:02:07 <simonstey> ... maybe a profile could implement such a feature
13:02:50 <simonstey> michaelS: looking at the old version of the vocab, present is defined as parent action of display
13:03:31 <simonstey> ... presenting something implies (imo) presenting to someone
13:03:38 <simonstey> ... rather than only to yourself
13:03:51 <simonstey> q?
13:04:24 <simonstey> phila: there's def. a distinction between presenting something to yourself and presenting something to a stadium
13:04:44 <renato> Proposal: remove "to an audience" from Present terms, display, play, text2speech
13:04:55 <simonstey> ... (a stadium with people in it)
13:04:58 <simonstey> +1
13:05:00 <Sabrina> +1
13:05:00 <ivan> 0
13:05:04 <renato> +1
13:05:05 <CarolineB> +1
13:05:58 <michaelS> +1
13:06:06 <renato> Resolution: remove "to an audience" from Present terms, display, play, text2speech
13:06:41 <simonstey> +q
13:06:41 <renato> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/103
13:07:27 <michaelS> The actions present, display, play and textToSpeech should include a note requiring to add a receipient party as a private or open audience.
13:08:57 <simonstey> simonstey: mentions different semantics of action "stream" for data community
13:09:13 <simonstey> ... streaming data vs streaming movies/audio/...
13:10:23 <renato> proposal: Add "stream" to action vocab - broad definition - not as a  narrower term of Present
13:10:43 <Sabrina> +1
13:10:45 <CarolineB> +1
13:10:49 <renato> +1
13:10:51 <simonstey>  0
13:10:52 <ivan> +1
13:11:00 <michaelS> 0
13:11:01 <phila> +1 although, again, I don't like enumerated lists in a vocab
13:11:08 <simonstey> renato: will work on the specific def. of stream
13:11:16 <renato> Resolved: Add "stream" to action vocab - broad definition - not as a  narrower term of Present
13:11:20 <simonstey> +1 to phil's comment
13:11:20 <victor> 0
13:11:33 <michaelS> q
13:11:37 <michaelS> q-
13:11:42 <simonstey> ack simonstey
13:12:00 <simonstey> victor: I opened a new issue few minutes ago
13:12:13 <simonstey> ... the ontology isn't OWL-DL
13:12:21 <renato> Victor's issue: https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/106
13:13:12 <simonstey> ... by removing rdfs:range we could make it OWL-DL
13:13:44 <simonstey> ... I could enrich this issue and propose changes
13:13:47 <ivan> yes
13:14:41 <simonstey> ... the specs can still change after next week right?
13:14:46 <simonstey> renato: you bet
13:14:55 <phila> q+
13:15:03 <michaelS> q+
13:15:38 <simonstey> phila: just for clarification -> the diagrams in both vocabs are slightly different.. why's that?
13:16:23 <simonstey> renato: [explains diff.]
13:16:59 <simonstey> phila: e.g., "status" in constraints isn't part of the figure in the vocab spec.. why?
13:18:01 <simonstey> phila: maybe worth considering adding an explanatory sentence to the figure in the vocab
13:18:13 <phila> q-
13:18:18 <phila> ack m
13:18:21 <simonstey> ... basically reiterating what you just said renatio
13:19:01 <simonstey> michaelS: status is "non-normative" what does that mean?
13:19:14 <simonstey> ... what's the difference in relevance?
13:19:40 <simonstey> ... we have two main actions -> use & transfer
13:19:49 <simonstey> ... where transfer now seems to be non-normative
13:20:44 <simonstey> renato: based on the implementation survey we did last year, we derived this distinction
13:21:29 <phila> q+
13:21:29 <simonstey> ... we have to have a number of implementations that implement the whole spec
13:22:58 <simonstey> michaelS: my concern is that someone who's not familiar with the W3C process might be inclined to reinterpret "non-normative" terms
13:23:36 <simonstey> phila: the distinction between normative<->non-normative might have to be recast
13:24:16 <simonstey> ... and we may want to consider change that to core/extension
13:24:47 <simonstey> ... will give both specs a more thorough readthrough until next week
13:25:59 <phila> q-
13:30:28 <ivan> q+
13:31:14 <CarolineB> *me - sorry have to go now
13:32:54 <phila> q+
13:34:09 <simonstey> [discussing generalities]
13:34:44 <phila> q-
13:34:48 <phila> ack i
13:35:29 <simonstey> ivan: instead of discussing generalities, the question is whether there are at least two different groups that implement e.g. display
13:36:01 <simonstey> ... if this can be proven, there is no point in not having it normative
13:36:07 <michaelS> q+
13:36:50 <simonstey> ... at this point we could also have certain terms being "at risk"
13:37:16 <simonstey> ... [relevant for CR]
13:38:30 <simonstey> michaelS: I would like to have an equal opportunity for all actions, as people may tend to avoid actions that are denoted as being "non-normative"
13:39:40 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:39:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/02/13-poe-minutes.html phila
13:40:20 <simonstey> renato: plan for next week -> vote on both documents
13:40:22 <simonstey> ... AOB=
13:40:37 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:40:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/02/13-poe-minutes.html phila
15:48:29 <Zakim> Zakim has left #poe