Re: Action vocabulary - final draft after call on 28 August

Of we are going to remove pay, I suggest we also include the possibility of
split compensation, and multiple payees.

Example:
1. Cost is 100 loyalty points from loyalty company and 50 Eur, money.

2. Cost is 50 Eur to A and 20 Eur to B.

Alapan

On Monday, September 1, 2014, Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org>
wrote:

> I think „compensation“ has two axes:
>
> -          What the value the compensation should/must be
>
> -          By which thing the compensation should be executed
>
>
>
> The axes could be in sync – but they don’t have to be:
>
>
>
> Example 1:
>
> Value = 1,000 EUR
>
> Compensation Thing = paid money
>
>
>
> Example 2:
>
> Value = 1,000 EUR
>
> Compensation Thing=barter
>
>
>
> Example 3:
>
> Value = 500 points
>
> Compensation Thing=loyality points
>
>
>
> Example 4:
>
> Value = 1,000 EUR
>
> Compensation Thing=loyality points
>
>
>
> We could consider this specification:
>
> -          The Compensation Thing is expressed by the value (term) of the
> Constraint name
>
> -          The compensation value is expressed by operator, rightOperand,
> dataType and unit
>
>
>
> If this specification is ok we could drop the “pay” duty from my point of
> view.
>
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> *From:* Renato Iannella [mailto:ri@semanticidentity.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ri@semanticidentity.com');>]
> *Sent:* Friday, August 29, 2014 6:14 AM
> *To:* ODRL Community Group
> *Subject:* Re: Action vocabulary - final draft after call on 28 August
>
>
>
>
>
> The updated draft also includes a new (duty) action called "compensate"
> which is a broader concept than "pay" - in that anything can be used as
> "compensation" (eg barter, loyalty points...)
>
>
>
> The original "pay" (duty) action is a now child concept (narrower) than
> "compensate".
>
>
>
> To use the "pay" duty, you typically use the "payAmount" constraint to
> indicate the payment amount.
>
> In general, some constraint must be used to indicate the "compensation"
> amount/type/value.
>
>
>
> Hence, you could use the new "compensate" duty action with the "payAmount"
> constraint.
>
>
>
> Should we then deprecate "pay" in favour of the broader "compensate" ?
>
>
>
> Cheers...
>
> Renato Iannella
>
> Semantic Identity
>
> http://semanticidentity.com
>
> Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206
>
>
>


-- 
Blog: http://idiots-mind.blogspot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------
Life's a gamble - take a chance