12:23:18 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #poe
12:23:18 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/07/03-poe-irc
12:23:20 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:23:20 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #poe
12:23:22 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
12:23:22 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
12:23:23 <trackbot> Meeting: Permissions and Obligations Expression Working Group Teleconference
12:23:23 <trackbot> Date: 03 July 2017
12:23:34 <renato> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:23:46 <renato> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20170703
12:23:56 <renato> present+
12:24:06 <renato> Chair: Ben
12:24:14 <renato> Regrets: Ivan
12:26:11 <renato> Regrets: +Caroline
12:27:53 <benws> benws has joined #poe
12:28:25 <benws> Hi Renato - what's the pw?
12:28:32 <renato> webexpoe
12:28:39 <benws> Thanks
12:28:45 <michaelS> michaelS has joined #poe
12:31:26 <simonstey> simonstey has joined #poe
12:31:37 <michaelS> present+
12:33:52 <benws> present+
12:34:32 <simonstey> present+
12:36:01 <Sabrina> Sabrina has joined #poe
12:36:40 <Sabrina> present+ Sabrina
12:37:03 <simonstey> scribe: simonstey
12:37:11 <simonstey> chair: benws
12:37:14 <simonstey> topic: admin
12:37:59 <simonstey> benws: approval of last week's minutes
12:38:09 <simonstey> ... hearing no objections
12:38:16 <simonstey> ... accepted
12:38:36 <simonstey> topic: github issues
12:38:59 <simonstey> benws: let's start with an easy one
12:39:18 <simonstey> https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/204
12:39:42 <benws> q?
12:39:52 <simonstey> ... I made a comment regarding inheriting status property
12:40:03 <simonstey> ... but since we disallow that anyway
12:42:21 <simonstey> simonstey: explaining the rationale behind it
12:42:25 <simonstey> benws: shall we take a vote?
12:42:47 <simonstey> PROPSAL: accept simonstey's proposal https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/204
12:43:28 <simonstey> RESOLUTION: accept simonstey's proposal to remove inheritallowed and allow multi-inheritance
12:43:34 <benws> q?
12:43:58 <simonstey> michaelS: https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/206
12:45:01 <simonstey> ... I feel atomic/compound constraints are exactly defined like one would define subclasses
12:45:06 <simonstey> but they currently aren
12:45:17 <simonstey> ... but they currently aren't
12:45:58 <simonstey> benws: I met a number of instances where a set of constraints were connected with ORs
12:46:47 <michaelS> q+
12:47:24 <simonstey> ... I'm proposing that left/rightoperand are subclasses of operand and allow an arbitrary number of those operands in compound constraints
12:48:08 <benws> q?
12:48:15 <benws> ack m
12:48:25 <simonstey> https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#core-components-logical
12:48:56 <simonstey> +q
12:50:46 <simonstey> odrl:or (:c1 :c2 :c3)
12:51:14 <benws> ack s
12:52:49 <simonstey> odrl:constraint [
12:52:56 <simonstey> odrl:or (....)
12:52:58 <simonstey> ]
12:53:08 <simonstey> odrl:constraints [
12:53:11 <simonstey> odrl:leftOp
12:53:18 <simonstey> odrl:operator odrl:eq
12:53:25 <simonstey> odrl:rightOp .. ]
12:54:13 <simonstey> (:c1 :c2 :c3)
12:55:01 <simonstey> simonstey: [giving examples]
12:57:55 <simonstey> benws: what about andsequence?
12:57:58 <benws> q?
12:58:14 <simonstey> ... we could have them as atomic constraints
12:58:30 <simonstey> michaelS: but rightoperands can't be resources
12:58:38 <simonstey> ... the current spec says literal
12:58:46 <simonstey> benws: well that's over restrictive
13:01:41 <michaelS> simonstey: suggested to open up the rightOperand to more than just literal values
13:02:02 <simonstey> simonstey: if you restrict rightoperands to literals, having a URI as value is basically nothing more than a string
13:03:11 <benws> q?
13:05:04 <simonstey> benws: shall we subclass them?
13:07:06 <simonstey> simonstey: [discussing differences of contraint types]
13:07:47 <simonstey> benws: we should raise 2 issues; one for clarifying the range of rightoperands
13:08:09 <simonstey> ... one for the compound constraints
13:09:06 <simonstey> topic: model clarification
13:10:10 <simonstey> benws: we have two issues here, 1. what duties on a policy level mean
13:10:18 <benws> q?
13:14:12 <simonstey> ... 2. policy conflicts & duties
13:19:31 <Sabrina> we would need - consequences
13:21:02 <Sabrina> q+
13:21:47 <simonstey> Sabrina: I always found it strange that duties were so tightly coupled to permissions
13:22:12 <simonstey> ... if you have a regulation, there are not really any permissions
13:22:22 <simonstey> ... you have obligations that you have to fulfill
13:22:39 <simonstey> ... and there are consequences if you don't do that
13:23:14 <simonstey> https://www.w3.org/community/odrl/model/2-1/#section-5#
13:25:50 <simonstey> renato: but is it as simple as adding a new property to duties?
13:26:00 <simonstey> Sabrina: well.. hasConsequence yes
13:26:05 <simonstey> ... but remedy not
13:26:31 <simonstey> q+
13:26:36 <simonstey> ack Sabrina
13:26:45 <simonstey> ... you can't just pick either or
13:27:16 <simonstey> benws: what are your thoughts on representing regulations with ODRL sabrina/simon?
13:27:50 <simonstey> benws: what about moving it to a profile?
13:27:55 <simonstey> Sabrina: meh
13:28:29 <benws> q?
13:28:35 <benws> ack s
13:30:24 <Sabrina> simonstey: I don't think it is such a big deal - we just need to add duties to the policies
13:30:31 <simonstey> benws: renato & michaelS are you comf. with giving 2 weeks time for coming up with a reasonable explain. for that?
13:30:55 <simonstey> renato: this group really has to finish this year
13:31:07 <simonstey> ... we don't have many implementors
13:31:25 <simonstey> ... if we don't meet the dec. deadline, we might get into trouble
13:33:10 <Sabrina> q+
13:34:01 <renato> RRSAgent, draft minutes V2
13:34:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/03-poe-minutes.html renato
13:34:46 <simonstey> benws: if we could have a proposal in 2 weeks time, we can consider having it
13:35:23 <renato> RRSAgent, draft minutes V2
13:35:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/03-poe-minutes.html renato
13:35:34 <michaelS> michaelS has left #poe