12:22:34 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #poe
12:22:34 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/04/10-poe-irc
12:22:36 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:22:36 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #poe
12:22:38 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
12:22:38 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
12:22:39 <trackbot> Meeting: Permissions and Obligations Expression Working Group Teleconference
12:22:39 <trackbot> Date: 10 April 2017
12:22:41 <phila> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20170410
12:22:53 <phila> chair: Ben
12:23:05 <phila> regrets+ Ivan
12:25:53 <victor> victor has joined #poe
12:27:46 <renato> present+ renato
12:28:32 <michaelS> michaelS has joined #poe
12:28:35 <ivan> ivan has joined #poe
12:29:39 <victor> present+ victor
12:30:48 <simonstey> present+
12:30:48 <Serena> Serena has joined #poe
12:31:41 <michaelS> present+
12:31:44 <phila> present+
12:33:03 <smyles> smyles has joined #poe
12:33:18 <smyles> present+
12:33:44 <benws> benws has joined #poe
12:33:54 <benws> present+
12:34:35 <Serena> present+
12:34:39 <simonstey> scribe: simonstey
12:34:47 <CarolineB> CarolineB has joined #poe
12:34:55 <ivan> present+
12:34:59 <simonstey> topic: Admin
12:35:08 <CarolineB> present+ CarolineB
12:35:23 <simonstey> benws: last week's minutes
12:35:47 <phila> resolution: Last week's minutes at https://www.w3.org/2017/04/03-poe-minutes approved
12:35:47 <simonstey> ... hearing no objections - approved!
12:35:57 <phila> Topic: Comments received
12:36:03 <renato> https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Deliverables
12:36:24 <simonstey> renato: the only thing we are really waiting for is horizontal review
12:36:41 <simonstey> ... which brian's doing
12:36:51 <simonstey> benws: haven't heard back from him
12:37:13 <renato> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Wide+Review%22
12:37:18 <simonstey> renato: I don't think we've sent out any other wide review requests though
12:37:38 <simonstey> benws: anything we want to discuss reg. already received feedback?
12:37:47 <renato> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/123
12:37:55 <simonstey> renato: I tagged related issues with "Wide Review"
12:38:11 <simonstey> ... there's an existing use case for that (uc24)
12:38:58 <simonstey> benws: if we include that term, and at the time the implementation reports come in noone implements it -> do we have to exclude it?
12:38:59 <ivan> q+
12:39:06 <simonstey> phila: short answer, yes
12:39:21 <ivan> q-
12:39:50 <simonstey> ... such terms can be flagged as features "at risk"
12:40:19 <simonstey> ... which is relevant for going to CR
12:41:01 <phila> regrets- Ivan
12:41:07 <simonstey> phila: we could also ask them to point us to others using that term
12:41:35 <simonstey> renato: synchronize is becoming more and more relevant for the music industry
12:42:10 <benws> q?
12:42:30 <renato> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Needs+WG+Decision%22
12:42:32 <simonstey> ... I would like to have an ODRL profile for the music industry in the future
12:42:47 <renato> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/122
12:43:34 <benws> q?
12:44:06 <renato> simon: spec says: to get a permission you must fufill duty
12:44:32 <renato> ... but some actions are not applicable..such as "uninstall"
12:44:36 <benws2> benws2 has joined #poe
12:45:05 <benws> q?
12:45:18 <renato> ...duty does not specify when to perform the duty
12:46:05 <renato> ... you should agree beforehand when to perform the duty
12:46:31 <michaelS> q+
12:47:28 <simonstey> michaelS: having been involved in these discussions, my thinking is -> on the commercial level you e.g. receive a good and have a due that to pay its price
12:47:54 <simonstey> ... under the assumption that the price will be paid
12:48:18 <simonstey> ... so that's a real use case
12:48:46 <benws> q?
12:49:00 <michaelS> ack michaelS
12:49:00 <benws> ack m
12:49:33 <victor> "must be satisfied" is time neutral, namely, it can refer to both a future and a past action.
12:53:25 <benws> q?
12:54:21 <simonstey> [discussing details on duties and their satisfiability]
12:54:41 <victor> q+
12:55:36 <renato> simon: the permission is only valid only after the duty is fulfilled
12:57:32 <renato> simon: suggestion: if there is not specific time in a constraint, the semantics are you agree to delete the asset, then the permission is valid
12:59:21 <renato> ... change the semantics of the vocab term (eg "has agreed to delete")
13:00:38 <simonstey> benws: another approach would be to say that as long as a duty doesn't have a temporal constraint attached
13:00:46 <renato> ben: or add "..unless the duty constraint has a temporal conditions"
13:01:11 <simonstey> ... you can only agree to do respective duty
13:01:31 <benws> q?
13:01:46 <victor> q-
13:03:21 <renato> simon: you fulfil the duty if you agree what the duty says
13:04:38 <renato> simon: ..indicate a requirements that is *agreed* to be satisfied
13:05:06 <benws> q?
13:05:11 <renato> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/22
13:05:13 <simonstey> benws: moving on to inheritance and overriden entities
13:05:19 <simonstey> TOPIC: issue 22
13:05:53 <simonstey> renato: simonstey raised this issue
13:06:05 <simonstey> ... proposing to remove "inheritRelation" from the core model
13:07:28 <benws> q?
13:09:06 <victor> I have never used inheritance relations and have no opinion on that.
13:09:39 <simonstey> smyles: I'm fine with it being removed.. I've never seen a pratical use of it anyway
13:09:45 <simonstey> michaelS: agreed
13:10:14 <simonstey> renato: we'll then remove it
13:10:45 <victor> q+
13:11:08 <simonstey> RESOLUTION: remove odrl:inheritRelation from ODRL
13:12:09 <benws> ack v
13:12:24 <simonstey> victor: do we plan to include SHACL shapes to the ODRL ontology?
13:12:29 <phila> q+
13:13:51 <phila> ack me
13:14:03 <simonstey> phila: although you can have valid/invalid policies, it's not a good thing to be dependend on other WG
13:15:17 <simonstey> TOPIC: formal semantics
13:16:00 <simonstey> ivan: I haven't gotten any invites for a call tmrw
13:16:12 <simonstey> victor: same time as today?
13:16:22 <victor> 12.30 GMT then?
13:16:28 <simonstey> ivan: should work for me
13:16:32 <simonstey> simonstey: +1
13:16:51 <victor> +1
13:16:52 <benws> q?
13:17:13 <simonstey> ivan: but we don't have a Webex set up either
13:17:25 <simonstey> ivan: I'll set one up and notify the group
13:18:14 <simonstey> TOPIC: best practices
13:18:27 <simonstey> benws: victor and myself had a call last week
13:19:01 <simonstey> ... we tried to indentify what ODRL profiles actually want to be
13:19:38 <benws> q?
13:19:38 <simonstey> ... it's important to emphasize that ODRL policies do not replace actual contracts
13:20:07 <phila> q+
13:20:34 <phila> ack me
13:20:46 <simonstey> phila: yes, that's very important stuff
13:21:00 <simonstey> ... we need to be both careful and confident at the same time
13:21:58 <simonstey> benws: the best practices document will talk about challenges of using ODRL for expressing e.g. licenses
13:22:22 <simonstey> ... it will only use fragments of licenses
13:23:05 <simonstey> phila: so you probably need ficticious licenses for examples
13:23:21 <renato> CC-BY !
13:23:24 <simonstey> ... I want to have CC-BY
13:24:33 <renato> https://w3c.github.io/poe/model/#provenace
13:24:35 <victor> You may want to check this:
13:24:38 <victor> http://purl.oclc.org/NET/rdflicense/cc-by2.0.ttl
13:24:48 <simonstey> benws: probably just talking about adding PROV-O concepts
13:25:05 <phila> q+
13:25:25 <renato> q+
13:25:52 <victor> By comparison, you may want to use the CreativeCommons version, which can obtained as RDFa at the official URI.
13:27:15 <simonstey> phila: thanks for the example, I wouldn't include all of the license text though
13:27:51 <simonstey> ... maybe also have something in the title that explicitly states that this is Victor's interpretation of CC-BY
13:28:20 <victor> You may want to see the Turtle extracted by the W3C RDF distiller of the same license by the original CreativeCommons publishers if you click here: https://www.w3.org/2012/pyRdfa/extract?uri=https%3A%2F%2Fcreativecommons.org%2Flicenses%2Fby%2F2.0&format=turtle&rdfagraph=output&vocab_expansion=false&rdfa_lite=false&embedded_rdf=true&space_preserve=true&vocab_cache=true&vocab_cache_report=false&vocab_cache_refresh=false
13:28:46 <simonstey> renato: [mentions smart contracts in that context]
13:29:44 <victor> UK's Open Government Licenses are also machine-readable
13:29:45 <victor> https://www.w3.org/2012/pyRdfa/extract?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationalarchives.gov.uk%2Fdoc%2Fopen-government-licence%2Fversion%2F3%2F&format=turtle&rdfagraph=output&vocab_expansion=false&rdfa_lite=false&embedded_rdf=true&space_preserve=true&vocab_cache=true&vocab_cache_report=false&vocab_cache_refresh=false
13:30:18 <michaelS> -1
13:30:19 <ivan> q+
13:30:23 <CarolineB> +1
13:30:25 <renato> ack me
13:30:27 <phila> PROPOSED: Move meeting back an hour
13:30:31 <simonstey> benws: should we have a quick strawpoll regarding meeting time?
13:30:34 <Serena> Serena has joined #poe
13:30:57 <smyles> +0
13:31:08 <phila> 0 (I don't mind)
13:31:21 <simonstey> 0
13:31:26 <simonstey> +1
13:32:29 <victor> 0 (I don't mind)
13:32:31 <simonstey> benws: discuss again enxt week
13:32:41 <renato> PROPOSAL: not accepted (for now)
13:32:59 <Serena> Serena has left #poe
13:33:09 <phila> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:33:19 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
13:33:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/04/10-poe-minutes.html phila
13:36:12 <benws> benws has joined #poe
14:04:49 <benws> benws has joined #poe
14:08:34 <benws2> benws2 has joined #poe
14:29:56 <benws> benws has joined #poe
15:01:35 <benws> benws has joined #poe
15:55:59 <Zakim> Zakim has left #poe
16:38:24 <benws2> benws2 has joined #poe
19:25:30 <benws> benws has joined #poe
19:29:16 <benws2> benws2 has joined #poe