Re: Use Cases

On 4/8/16 6:02 AM, Renato Iannella wrote:
> Dear CG, the W3C POE WG is now collecting Use Cases for potential
> enhancements to the ODRL model.
>
> Please see: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases for details on
> the UC template and submission details.
>
> If you have any new business use cases that maybe relevant, then
> please submit.

What does the word 'business' imply in this sentence? Is it a 
meaningful limiter, or was it more or less accidental?

The main page of the POE working group does not give this limitation 
where it states at the outset:
"The Permissions and Obligations Expression (POE) Working Group has 
been chartered to create recommendations for expressing permissions 
and obligations statements for digital content."

To my mind, important uses of such POEs include, say, whistleblowers 
who wish to provide data and remain anonymous (for retaliation 
reasons), or journalists who have discovered atrocities and wish to 
provide the data publicly without needing any payment, or 
artists/writers of various types who are in difficult social 
situation, and who may have something they wish distributed, possibly 
pseudonymously, without needing or wanting payment.

I think it's arguable that any of those case are not 'business' uses. 
Does that mean they will not be considered as needing to be covered by 
ODRL, as far as the POE working group goes?

As far as I'm aware, the W3C is largely funded by business, and it 
would not be inconsistent with other of their recent decisions and 
undertakings if this were true: if 'business' uses only were being 
considered, and the ones I've listed were overlooked as not necessary 
-- for business.

But for society as a whole, that would not be true. So I seek 
clarification on this point, and hope that the quote given at the top 
is meant to include all important use cases of POE for society, not 
just 'business' ones in a limited sense that involves money transfer.

An overlapping issue with this: I can't tell whether the case of 
'pseudo-anonymity' is already covered or not by the comprehensively 
listed generic and specific use cases in "POE.UC.02", 
(https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases) even for business. It is 
not specifically mentioned there however.

So I'll note then that 'Pseudo-Anonymity', with examples for both 
business and non-business scenarios, has been included as a core use 
case by the Verifiable Credentials Task Force. See section 4.4.3:
http://w3c.github.io/webpayments-ig/VCTF/use-cases/

Pseudo-Anonymity implies that the holder of the data can choose to 
remain anonymous or pseudonymous in all data-control actions unless 
specifically required by a legal jurisdiction, say by a warrant. This 
splitting into 'pseudo' allows most of the advantages of anonymity to 
the data holder, while avoiding the problems of true full anonymity 
such as crime and terrorism. It seems like a happy medium that should 
be covered by POE (ODRL). It would be important in all three of the 
non-monetary uses I listed above, and others.

Steven Rowat



>
> Renato
>

Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2016 17:16:28 UTC