Re: [poe] Role of the ODRL Common Vocabulary and of Profiles

re IM/Core Vocab and ODRL Processors and Profiles: 
Is it agreed by the WG that a Profile claims that a feature of the IM "does not have an active role in this Profile" - e.g. Offer and Duty should not be used by Policies of Profile XYZ?
Even in this case any ODRL Processor **must** be able to process any IM/Core Vocab term properly. By that I mean if in a Profile XYZ Policy a Duty is used the Processor can give a notice "should not be used with Profile XYZ" but it must not raise "Error: the thing Duty is unknown".
If the WG considers this to be too open to potentially spoiling the IM it is also ok not to support this "making features inactive".
(Ok, I say that with my RightsML Profile hat on my head :-) )

re " ... then it **may** continue ...": right, I agree this sentence is strange - if a Processor doesn't conform to a Profile why to discuss how it might process the Policy without the Profile, that's an implicit contradiction.
So it would be better to shorten the sentence to "If an ODRL Processor does not conform to the ODRL Profile it should stop processing the Policy." 

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by nitmws
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/210#issuecomment-315285349 using your GitHub account

Received on Friday, 14 July 2017 06:52:15 UTC