Meeting minutes
Admin
Minutes: https://
[discussion of minutes]
Resolution: Accept minutes of last meeting
Outstanding Tasks
Ben: success criteria was if we could translate 20 core common licences Laura identified
… I've been through 10 of those with endless repeating patterns.
… confident this is doable and will continue to look.
… Michelle did volunteer the ASX license as potential different structure
… I will see the set of test cases and see if we need to add some terms
… we will discuss them in the meeting
… once we've done that, we'll be near a version 1
… where I would like to manage this going forward is on the GitHub site
<Ben goes through the GitHub issues>
Ben: as we go through the test cases, there will be places where we will need to get to places that need to add some test cases/vocabulary
… once we have no open issues, we are in a position to publish
Mark: the test cases are a subset
Ben: we need to prioritise them and at least get through the P1 by the end of Q1
From Contract to Policy
Ben: in our day to day job, how contracts touch back with policies. Not part of the ODRL, provide some kind of wrapper
Ilya: does this metadata exist within the ODRL or outside
Ben: is it information that we need
Nigel: raises an interesting question
Ben: in trying to answer this question, I came up with this model
… Wonder if a standardised pattern would be of value
… terms have to be signed, then there are guidance documents that give advice to the application of this license
<Ben goes through the list of documents>
<jo_> (Ben is discussing https://
<jo_> s/ dsicussion/discussion/
<jo_> s|s/ dsicussion/discussion/||
Nigel: describes some combinations of policies/contracts
Mark: describes the hierarchy
Caspar: what if the policy is not in ODRL
Nigel: but is this part of ODRL ?
… follows describing his thinking
Ilya: by bringing this part, are we not biting more than we can chew?
Ben: if I have a permission in front of me, what is the actual paperwork that is connected to the policy
Ilya: can we just have something like a unique identifier ?
Nigel: better if we just focus at the scope and point or have a pointer at the document and that's all
Michelle: there is a bit to it that we can strip out like when some parties have to notify
Ben: something with a lot of meat is out of the question
Ilya: if the concept is to track back to an agreement, can we not just have a prefix of their organisational name at the time and an autoincremental unique ID
Ilya: one concern when we go into this detail and companies are bought all the time
Ben: I am absolutely not trying to cover this
Nigel: there is value, but just to put an identifier without trying to go too deep
Caspar: if we use an URI schema, I am specifically interested into linking to specific sections of a contract from the policy
Ilya: for those not familiar: URI - Universal Resource Identifier
MarkB: would that take the form of a new contract entity
Test Cases
Mark: maybe 12 test cases make more sense, the reason I ask is that if we go for a larger number it might be larger scope, but with few we can go deep and more detail
Ben: I spent this week covering each of the test cases
… some we have already covered, at the moment my feeling is we can cover them all
Mark: once we've done that, we can put Laura and Michelle on the spot and see if there is anything specific that is of particular interest
Ben: that would really be useful
… first thing I did was to group the cases
<goes through the cases>
Mark: makes sense, 2 things that are implicit
… if the price of something is $0 it is usually not in a price list and it will have to be explicit
… the definition to pay obligations needs to be complete
Olga: about delayed data, does timeliness covers delays of data ?
Ben: often licenses don't explicitly say that, people just make assumptions ... I can delay data for free
… I am proposing that we create a world were people can only use what they are permissions
… we should explicitly create permissions and have the associated duties
… the assumption here is if you get a real-time fee, and you then delay it by 15 minutes
Nigel: some contracts say "if you delay data, you will need our consent of how you delay it"
Ben: yes, we can create duties for that
Olga: it does make sense
Ben: what level of delay data
… we can capture that as properties in the language
<jo__> (discussion relates to https://
<Ben goes and continues with the test cases>
Laura: the ones around cancellation will be very common, very easily achievable. The ones around non-display are a bit more dicey. They are always questions that are getting asked.
… it is such a keen area right now.
Ben: reminds me, I have a question for the group. VWAPS ?
… Is it OK to display or do you need to get a licence for displaying that ?
Laura: as we have exchanges for which any calculation is for non-display use
Mark: do any of the test cases that we have cover
<Ben continues with the test cases>
Michelle: a lot of contracts are explicit "if it is not in here, it is not permitted"
Mark: it is important the concept of application, am I going to pay more if I fire another application.
Ben: there is of course the use of "system" that sounds much bigger than an application
Nigel: there is also discrepancies in the definition of application
Mark: is there anything defined in here?
Ben: there is the concept of automated trading
Laura: it is the same challenge with anything non-display.
… am I going to end up with more cases where it is not clear?
Ben: we maybe be able to make it more clear
… am I allow to do 'this, this and this' ... and get the exchanges to answer
… I know it sounds pretty simple
Caspar: can I ask a question - will we have a taxonomy of derived data ?
Ben: I am hoping of the use of a prohibition, you are allowed 'non-display' but you can't do a b or c. I am hoping that the use of the prohibition will save us the detail of these taxonomies
AOB
Ben: for JPMorgan and DataBP that your feedback is fantastic, and for any other organisation to please review
<jo__> many thanks once again to Josh for scribing
<jo__> --- meeting closed ---
<jo__> s/Resolution: Accept minutes of last meeting/RESOLUTION: Accept minutes of last meeting/