Re: Formal Semantics

On Fri, March 31, 2017 9:27 am, Simon Steyskal wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> Go ahead without me. I will not be available until the 11th, and there
>> is no reason to wait for me. I can always comment on the outcome using
>> the usual channels…
>
> I think it makes more sense to just postpone the call such that all of
> us can participate. After the 11th, when are you available again Ivan?

I am back home on Monday the 10th, and I am available for the rest of the week, modulo other calls.

Are all potential participants from Europe? Or Europe and Australia? Because if so, we can also schedule a call before
lunch on Wed or Thursday, for example; that may be easier.

Ivan


>
> br simon
>
> Am 2017-03-31 10:07, schrieb Ivan Herman:
>>> On 31 Mar 2017, at 09:00, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel
>>> <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I see we cannot set a call with more than two participants.
>>> Shall we start speak speaking in a first call Simon and I and then in
>>> a second call with Ivan?
>>> Ivan when are you available?
>>>
>>
>> Go ahead without me. I will not be available until the 11th, and there
>> is no reason to wait for me. I can always comment on the outcome using
>> the usual channels…
>>
>> Ivan
>>
>>
>>> Víctor
>>>
>>>
>>> El 27/03/2017 a las 18:32, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel escribió:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> I have created a doodle poll to see when can we meet to discuss the
>>>> scope and ambition of the formal semantics note. Link:
>>>> https://beta.doodle.com/poll/ricy6h4iha3b5s4z
>>>>
>>>> I have set a fixed time (12.30 GMT) and several different days trying
>>>> to concile the different constraints you have emailed already.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Víctor
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> El 27/03/2017 a las 15:35, Phil Archer escribió:
>>>>> As ever, the minutes of today's meeting are at
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/2017/03/27-poe-minutes with a text snapshot
>>>>> below. Thanks Michael for scribing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Main topic today was Sabrina's new use case of modelling the GDPR
>>>>> using a profile of ODRL.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Permissions and Obligations Expression Working Group Teleconference
>>>>>
>>>>> 27 March 2017
>>>>>
>>>>>   [2]Agenda [3]IRC log
>>>>>
>>>>>      [2] https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20170327
>>>>>      [3] http://www.w3.org/2017/03/27-poe-irc
>>>>>
>>>>> Attendees
>>>>>
>>>>>   Present
>>>>>          benws, benws110, ivan, michaelS, phila, renato, Sabrina,
>>>>>          Serena, smyles, victor
>>>>>
>>>>>   Regrets
>>>>>          Brian, Caroline, Simon
>>>>>
>>>>>   Chair
>>>>>          Ben
>>>>>
>>>>>   Scribe
>>>>>          michaelS
>>>>>
>>>>> Contents
>>>>>
>>>>>     * [4]Meeting Minutes
>>>>>         1. [5]Last week's minutes
>>>>>         2. [6]New Use Case
>>>>>         3. [7]Deliverables
>>>>>         4. [8]best practices
>>>>>         5. [9]open Actions
>>>>>         6. [10]London F2F
>>>>>     * [11]Summary of Action Items
>>>>>     * [12]Summary of Resolutions
>>>>>
>>>>> Meeting Minutes
>>>>>
>>>>>   <benws110> nick benws
>>>>>
>>>>>   <victor> hi all
>>>>>
>>>>>   <renato> hi victor
>>>>>
>>>>>   scribe michaelS
>>>>>
>>>>> Last week's minutes
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: anybody want to raise an issue with last week's minutes
>>>>>
>>>>>   <phila> [NOTUC]
>>>>>
>>>>>   <phila> [13]Last week's minutes
>>>>>
>>>>>     [13] https://www.w3.org/2017/03/20-poe-minutes.html
>>>>>
>>>>>   Resolved: last week's minutes approved
>>>>>
>>>>>   <renato> [14]https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/
>>>>>   Use_Cases#POE.UC.37_Representing_regulations_using_ODRL
>>>>>
>>>>>     [14]
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases#POE.UC.37_Representing_regulations_using_ODRL
>>>>>
>>>>> New Use Case
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: introduced the Use Case
>>>>>   … it models the EU General Data Protection Regulation
>>>>>   … it needs to cover that at a generic level but also in details
>>>>>   … Article 12 added as an example
>>>>>   … this article shows the important use of references to other
>>>>>   articles
>>>>>   … the numbering of the articles has at least two levels
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: any comments on that so far?
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: does this requirement belong to a profile or to the
>>>>>   general ODRL model?
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: this is a decision by this group
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: what does "refer to another article" mean?
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: that are dependencies - look at Article 12. This may
>>>>>   transform to many duties.
>>>>>   … to check if Article 12 is fullfilled the fulfillment of other
>>>>>   articles is required
>>>>>
>>>>>   phila: GDPR is very important it would be a big PR win if ODRL
>>>>>   could show that it can cover it.
>>>>>   … key question: is ODRL is a good tool for that purpose.
>>>>>   Sabrina do you feel that?
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: ODRL is not a bad fit. We need to specify obligations
>>>>>   and constraints
>>>>>   … There is work on taxonomies by other parties but less
>>>>>   fitting.
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: we could promote this as a profile. This would serve to
>>>>>   explain how to create a profile
>>>>>   … and this profile could be shown to a wide audience.
>>>>>   … the relationships between the constraints and duties is
>>>>>   demandingö
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: we have dependencies between the duties, we have
>>>>>   constraints on duties, actions and parties
>>>>>   … supported to create a profile for that.
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: to show that we could express regulations and licences
>>>>>   by the same language would be fine
>>>>>
>>>>>   phil
>>>>>
>>>>>   phila: supported using ODRL for this purpose
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: we are basically defining obligiations = duties =
>>>>>   complying with the regulations
>>>>>   … if we run into problems we will come back to this group
>>>>>   … when it comes to constraints: there are discretational ones
>>>>>
>>>>>   smyles: suggested to model optional constraints as permissions
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: that's not exactly the intention of the GDPR
>>>>>   … there are statements like a recommendation - and we don't
>>>>>   want to omit them
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: is thinking what this could look like in code:
>>>>>   leftOperand say you may or may not use an icon
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: need for a discretional constraint: it would be good
>>>>>   to meet this constraint but it doesn't stop the policy
>>>>>   … if it is not met
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: for her and Simon some constraints a bit fuzzy, needs
>>>>>   deeper reviews
>>>>>
>>>>>   smyles: we may add a concept of recommendation = if you can,
>>>>>   you should do that
>>>>>   … there could be levels of recommendation: strongly recommended
>>>>>   ... and more
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: will review this suggestion
>>>>>
>>>>>   <renato> [15]https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119
>>>>>
>>>>>     [15] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119
>>>>>
>>>>>   <phila> The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL",
>>>>>   "SHALL
>>>>>
>>>>>   <phila> NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
>>>>>
>>>>>   <phila> "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as
>>>>>   described in
>>>>>
>>>>>   <phila> RFC 2119.
>>>>>
>>>>>   phila: RFC2119 is a standard specifying things like that -
>>>>>   could help
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: Dispensation = something is required, but there is a
>>>>>   dispensation under specific condiditions.
>>>>>   … and some articles say "you are not allowed" others say
>>>>>   "unless party X allows that"
>>>>>
>>>>>   <victor> Dispensation: a : an exemption from a law or from an
>>>>>   impediment, vow, or oath may be granted a dispensation from the
>>>>>   rule b : a formal authorization requested a dispensation to
>>>>>   form another lodge
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: in fact: an exception on an exception
>>>>>   … may also be used
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: went over some more details of transforming DGPR into
>>>>>   ODRL
>>>>>
>>>>>   victor: thinks like that can be expressed by ODRL.
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: we are looking not only at GDPR but also legal
>>>>>   regulations in general - is the existing ODRL data model work
>>>>>   for us
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: what are "features"
>>>>>
>>>>>   victor: we could think about synonyms for hardwired constraints
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: two more things: "Feature" = article 12 has various
>>>>>   obligations, some are well defined, some don't stand on their
>>>>>   own.
>>>>>   … we are looking at conjunctions and disjunctions in this
>>>>>   context
>>>>>   … transparency is the conjunction of all of them - we call them
>>>>>   Features at the moment
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: we need additional constraints on the asset - they
>>>>>   will span across multiple duties
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: ODRL scope could work
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: agreed
>>>>>   … we have an issue with the type of processing - e.g. how
>>>>>   personal data may be used for marketing
>>>>>
>>>>>   smyles: the purpose is to define the nature of a party - right?
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: yes, depending on who you are rules may apply
>>>>>
>>>>>   smyles: why not to split up in constraints for group A and
>>>>>   group B of persons
>>>>>
>>>>>   smyles: wondered if inheritance could be used
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: the controllers for different purposes are different
>>>>>   … we look at what's there and then will come back to this group
>>>>>   … the Wiki space could be used for discussions
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: timeline?
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: there are different groups of work: e.g. transforming
>>>>>   the article and the sub-points - but that's not very usable.
>>>>>   … in a next step obligations have to be pulled out of the
>>>>>   articles - and that's a big work, will take months.
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: does this timeline align with the ODRL timeline?
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: yes.
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: do we need a new policy type "regulation"?
>>>>>
>>>>>   Sabrina: yes
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: supported to use Wikipages for working on the
>>>>>   transformation
>>>>>
>>>>> Deliverables
>>>>>
>>>>>   <renato> [16]https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Deliverables
>>>>>
>>>>>     [16] https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Deliverables
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: went over [17]https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/
>>>>>   Deliverables
>>>>>
>>>>>     [17] https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Deliverables
>>>>>
>>>>>   <renato> [18]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/
>>>>>   public-poe-comments/2017Mar/0012.html
>>>>>
>>>>>     [18]
>>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-poe-comments/2017Mar/0012.html
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: we got a reply from EDRLabs
>>>>>
>>>>>   <renato> [19]https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/118
>>>>>
>>>>>     [19] https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/118
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: raised some concerns regarding periods
>>>>>   … this needs an update of the definitions of date/time and
>>>>>   period constraints
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: re Horizontal reviews:
>>>>>   … any news from Brian?
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: has sent a reminder
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: reviews seem to be on track
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: refered to a proposoal of Victor to hold a special
>>>>>   meeting
>>>>>   … = a call
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: asked Victor to launch a Doodgle survey for finding date
>>>>>   and time
>>>>>
>>>>> best practices
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: tried to reach out to James from Catapult, but the email
>>>>>   did not work
>>>>>
>>>>> open Actions
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: only 3 on the issue tracker
>>>>>
>>>>>   <phila> s/RESOLVED: last week's minutes approved//
>>>>>
>>>>>   <renato> [20]https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/114
>>>>>
>>>>>     [20] https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/114
>>>>>
>>>>> London F2F
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: open issue is providing hotel rooms at TR rates - but
>>>>>   Sabrina may have an alternative
>>>>>
>>>>>   victor: would appreciate to have times for the agenda items
>>>>>
>>>>>   bens: starting time 10am - ok?
>>>>>
>>>>>   renato: agenda will be based on requests from group members and
>>>>>   currently ongoing work
>>>>>
>>>>>   <ivan> will there be possibiltiies for dial in?
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: suggested 5:30pm as closing time
>>>>>
>>>>>   <ivan> thanks
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: it will be possible to dial in too
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: AOB?
>>>>>
>>>>>   benws: none was raised - bye
>>>>>
>>>>> Summary of Action Items
>>>>>
>>>>> Summary of Resolutions
>>>>>
>>>>>    1. [21]last week's minutes approved
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel
>>> D3205 - Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
>>> Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial
>>> ETS de Ingenieros Informáticos
>>> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
>>>
>>> Campus de Montegancedo s/n
>>> Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, Spain
>>> Tel. (+34) 91336 3753
>>> Skype: vroddon3
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ----
>> Ivan Herman, W3C
>> Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>> mobile: +31-641044153
>> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
> ---
> DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal
> Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna
>
> www: http://www.steyskal.info/  twitter: @simonsteys
>
>


-- 
Ivan Herman, W3C Team
URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Friday, 31 March 2017 17:01:51 UTC