- From: Renato Iannella via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 00:40:28 +0000
- To: public-poe-archives@w3.org
> The handling of an internal infringed/violated status is inconsistent for the different properties of type Duty. I would state this more as the "handling of statuses is dependent on the semantics of the different properties" > re "infringed": it is a surprised to see "infringed" as status of Permission I added this row as, otherwise, and ODRL evaluator would not know when (or if) a consequence is required to be fulfilled. (?) > I think a row intentionally without a status in the "action" column doesn't make sense. Or is only the "Not-Exercised" missing? Since the constraint is "not-satisfied", then it does not matter what the action cell says? > For a full coverage of stati the case Infringed/Satisfied/ / Fulfilled/ /Not-Exercised/Not-Fulfilled should be included. Yes, what others states are missing :-) [states.pdf](https://github.com/w3c/poe/files/1247402/states.pdf) -- GitHub Notification of comment by riannella Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/211#issuecomment-324500229 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 24 August 2017 00:40:26 UTC