RE: Comment on Action vocabulary

I'm fine with this added language. But for modify and addTo I propose to
move " A new asset is not created " from the comment to the definition - as
changing content could also be understood as creating a new asset and
excluding this must be part of the definition.

Thanks,
Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Renato Iannella [mailto:ri@semanticidentity.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 5:35 AM
> To: ODRL Community Group
> Subject: Re: Comment on Action vocabulary
> 
> We can use the comments to add some clarification:
> 
> ====
> 
> modify: The Assigner permits/prohibits the Assignee(s) to update existing
> content of the Asset
> Comment: A new asset is not created
> 
> addTo: The Assigner permits/prohibits the Assignee(s) to add content to
the
> Asset
> Comment: A new asset is not created. The original asset content can be
> modified, only new content added.
> 
> derive: The Assigner permits/prohibits the Assignee(s) to create a new
> derivative Asset from this Asset and to edit the derivative.
> Comment: A new asset is created. The derivative Asset may have significant
> overlaps with the original Asset.
> 
> extract: The Assigner permits/prohibits the Assignee(s) to extract parts
of
> the Asset and to use it as a new Asset.
> Comment: A new asset is created. The new Asset may have no overlaps with
> the original Asset.
> ===
> 
> Comments/updates/derivatives ?
> 
> Renato
>

Received on Thursday, 6 November 2014 08:51:12 UTC