Re: [formal-semantics] clarification regarding Example 14 monitoring scenario

First, you should note that Offers have no assignees (they are offerings to a market), the wording of E14 + the example might need modification to avoid confusion.

 

·         Policy - A non-empty group of Permissions (via the permission property) and/or Prohibitions (via the prohibition property) and/or Duties (via the obligation property). The Policy class is the parent class to the Set, Offer, and Agreement subclasses:
Set - a subclass of Policy that supports expressing generic Rules.
Offer - a subclass of Policy that supports offerings of Rules from assigner Parties.
Agreement - a subclass of Policy that supports granting of Rules from assigner to assignee Parties.
 

So to answer your questions:
No – it should be performed on an Agreement.
The example is clear “otherwise it is not permitted and the system will block it.” – so ‘to perform’ the action shouldn’t be a scenario.
i & ii - “Prohibitions and Obligations have been violated or fulfilled.” – E14 is a Permission  (From your link - https://w3c.github.io/odrl/formal-semantics/#intro)

 

Hope this helps!

 

From: Sridhar Krishnamurthy <ksridhar@amagi.com>
Date: Monday 12 February 2024 at 13:51
To: <public-odrl@w3.org>
Subject: [formal-semantics] clarification regarding Example 14 monitoring scenario
Resent-From: <public-odrl@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 13:51:05 +0000

 

This is with respect to the monitoring scenario associated with example 14 in https://w3c.github.io/odrl/formal-semantics/#sematics-of-permission.

 

The https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-model/#constraint-action in the ODRL Information Model that contains the EXAMPLE 14 specifies that the Policy is an Offer.

 

Questions:

 

1. In this context, is the statement '... if a print action that satisfies the refinement is performed ...' valid ? Can an action be performed on a Offer.

2. Even if an action were to be performed, shouldn't 

   a. The column P1.usage state be changed to P1.deontic state and values for both E14-1 and E14-2 be marked as VIOLATED as per

      (i)  ODRL Evaluator/Policy Monitoring Scenario in https://w3c.github.io/odrl/formal-semantics/#intro and

      (ii) Deontic state in https://w3c.github.io/odrl/formal-semantics/#section3 although this state is only applicable to Prohibition, Obligation and Condition.

 

regards  

    

 


DISCLAIMER: The contents of this email, including any attachments that it may contain, are privileged and confidential information, and may also constitute as proprietary, and are intended solely for the use of the addressee(s).. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by email and delete the original message. Unintended recipients are strictly prohibited from copying, disclosing, and/or distributing such contents in any manner or form. Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this transmission that do not relate to the official business of Amagi, including all its affiliates, shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. Any statements made herein that are tantamount to contractual obligations, promises, claims or commitments shall not be binding on the Company unless expressly and specifically stated as otherwise, or followed by written confirmation, by an authorized signatory of the Company.