W3C

– DRAFT –
DPVCG Meeting Call

05 OCT 2022

Attendees

Present
beatriz, delaram, georg, harsh, paul, tek
Regrets
-
Chair
harsh
Scribe
harsh

Meeting minutes

Previous minutes

Rules

harsh shared the creation of rule concepts in DPV along with examples - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dpvcg/2022Oct/0000.html

The group has discussed this and agreed to the following.

We will have concept `Rule` with relation `hasRule` for general association with rules. For specific concepts, we will specialise both the relation and the concept for Permission, Prohibition, and Obligation.

This will be added to the main DPV spec. It will be accompanied with text explaining the concepts, limitations of scope and interpretation (see email above), and pointing to other specs that provide more comprehensive concepts.

We will await any issues/problems on this resolution before accepting it in the next meeting.

Further details / points made during the discussion are as follows.

georg: making a distinction between technical and legal interpretation of these 'rules'

Exercising Rights

This is a continued discussion from previous meeting.

We discussed how to express rights, exercising of rights, and exemptions to the exercising of rights. We await examples and more detailed proposals for these.

beatriz proposed the addition of RightExemption as a concept modelling the exemption to a right

We discussed this, and agreed on the following.

We have Active and Passive rights (from earlier discussion), we have proposed `isExercisedAt` as a relation to express `RightExercise`, and using `isApplicableFor` and `isNotApplicableFor` to express conditions where the right may or may not be applied or be exempted from.

Note here that DPV has the existing concepts `hasScope Scope` that can be used to indicate 'is applicable for' with a separate relation to describe what is not in scope or what is being exempted i.e. as `isNotApplicableFor` with some condition

To express what needs to be done for a right, we reuse the `hasObligation` relation from rules discussion to express obligations associated with the right.

Cloud concepts in dpv-tech

tek: concepts such as edge computing and multi-region clouds where region overlaps or crosses (jurisdictional) boundaries should be represented as these are growing common in use-cases

We discussed whether the 'cloud' concept can be described using `hasLocation` and specifying multiple locations, and that the perspective of 'multi-region' may be jurisdiction dependant.

For example, for a cloud with servers in FR and DE, the notion of multi-region (jurisdiction) does not apply for EU as these are both in EU, but applies for FR and DE each as the other is not a region located in the same country.

The discussion can be continued on GitHub https://github.com/w3c/dpv/issues/47

Next Meeting

Next Meeting will be in 1 week, on OCT-12. Timing will be confirmed later as harsh and beatriz are both travelling on the day, and we may start later than usual.

Topic will be resolution of rules, continued discussion on rights exercise, and other items on the agenda.

References shared during the meeting -

smashHit core ontology, from the smashHit H2020 project https://smashhiteu.github.io/smashHitCore/ that provides concepts such as Obligation status and contract metadata

We have invited tek and the project to liase with DPVCG for continued development of the ontology after the duration of the project

Similarly, we have invited members to propose their work for inclusion and integration with DPVCG - delaram for AI Act vocabulary, and beatriz for DGA vocabulary.

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 192 (Tue Jun 28 16:55:30 2022 UTC).