W3C

Rights Automation Community Group Teleconference

09 June 2021

Attendees

Present
ali, ben, Caspar, jo, MarkB, MarkD, michelle, Nigel, olga
Regrets
renato
Chair
jo
Scribe
nigelp

Meeting minutes

Admin

Resolution: Accept minutes of last meeting

FISD Update

ben: two other meetings coming up.
… Exchange constituency: any topics?
… propose to raise asking them to work with us on ODRL modelling of licenses

Mark: ask for feedback on reservations they have about ODRL?

ben: will use "Lego block" analogy to illustrate what ODRL offers

Mark: makes point we need exchange input to help get definitions around things like "derived data" right.

ben: only have consumer perspective
… also have meeting with Federation of European Stock Exchanges. They have expressed interest in standardisation.
… FISD. Have clear plan now. Mark introduces standard, Video demo of consent duties, Video demo of standardised descriptions.
… then panel discussion.

jo: have been asked to take sceptical tone when moderating panel to ensure concerns are raised and addressed.

Editor's Meeting

jo: items raised: identifiers, white label, web site, proscription. Ben to discuss

ben: Identifiers.
… Caspar considering possible ways to represent identifiers.

Caspar_MacRae: recommending URI, proposal out end of week, hopefully.

ben: When referencing other standards we should note the cross reference in the standard and provide a place holder where we can annotate the reference to indicate our interpretation
… see "External References" section.
… questions around who hosts the feed. Standard can model known use cases - vendor hosted, web hosting and deployed feed. Feedback sought on if this covers everything.

Markd: discusses case where an internally hosted service is outsourced

ben: would model the two stages separately (in-house vs vendor hosted)
… key driver here is around license terms where there is more sensitivity around data that consumers are managing themselves.

ben: duty action of "agreement".
… to handle cases where a legally binding agreement is required (usually to enforce a proscription)
… use cases exist where you cannot do A/B/C without prior consent. This was modeled as a duty, but feedback is that it might work better as a "prohibition" with a "remedy"

MarkD: considers case where by default you may not distribute but you may be able to get selective approval on a case by case basis.

Caspar_MacRae: disagree with "prohibition/remedy" model.

Markd: recognise Caspar's concern.

jo: asks if Remedy is defined term

ben: comes from base ODRL

jo: why do we need two ways of representing the same thing?

ben: trying to fit better with people's mental models of what is happening (at the cost of complexity in processing)

Action: Ben to report on exchange view on requirement for prohibition

Maintenance of the Standard

ben: expectation standard will evolve over time.
… how to control changes and minimise disruption.
… how to handle cases where requestor and policy managing component have different policy versions. How do we fail gracefully?
… part of this will be having static and stable terms

NigelP: suggest analogy with how software interfaces are defined with major and minor version numbers.

Action: Caspar and Nigel to come up with some ideas on Versions and forwards and Backwards compatibility

AOB

<jo_> --- meeting closed ---

Summary of action items

  1. Ben to report on exchange view on requirement for prohibition
  2. Caspar and Nigel to come up with some ideas on Versions and forwards and Backwards compatibility

Summary of resolutions

  1. Accept minutes of last meeting
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 136 (Thu May 27 13:50:24 2021 UTC).

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/licensed/licenses/

Succeeded: s/Exchange/... Exchange

Succeeded: s/three items/identifiers, white label, web site, proscription

Succeeded: s/Mark:/Markd:

Succeeded: s/agreement/agreement is required/

Succeeded 8 times: s/jo_/jo/g

Maybe present: Caspar_MacRae, Mark, NigelP