- From: Renato Iannella <ri@semanticidentity.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 23:10:55 +1000
- To: Simon Steyskal <ssteyska@wu.ac.at>
- Cc: public-odrl@w3.org
> On 21 Jan 2015, at 19:16, Simon Steyskal <ssteyska@wu.ac.at> wrote: > > One thing that bothers me for quite some time now is the representation of the relationship between Policy and Asset as indicated in [1]. Assuming some kind of UML-like class diagram notation, the arc used to represent this relationship actually represents a generalization/is-a relationship [2]. I don't think, that's the intended meaning..? Hi Simon, that actually is the intention (that a Policy is a typeof/subclass of an Asset). One example for this was to enable a Duty to refer to an Asset - in the case of nextPolicy, to indicate another Policy that is itself an Asset. Cheers... Renato Iannella Semantic Identity http://semanticidentity.com Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206
Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2015 13:11:29 UTC