Re: [poe] Add Constraint to Party and Asset

In my view, any kind of modifier to the identification of a party is a
mistake.

I'm against the "scoping" of parties as being either individuals or 
groups.
And, similarly, I think that the idea of identifying a party and then
filtering that party based on some kind of criteria (such as a 
constraint)
is very problematic. Specifically, I think it will be very difficult 
to
implement these kinds of filtering schemes in a way that will always
deliver the same results. In other words, I think you will wind up 
with
different results from different engines.

I realize, however, that this has been established as a requirement. 
But
can anyone explain what is the reason behind the requirement? Why 
isn't it
sufficient to just identify a party?

Regards,

Stuart

On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Renato Iannella 
<notifications@github.com>
wrote:

> I don't think ODRL should get into defining members of groups (of 
parties).
> We *try* to stick to identifying the party - and thats it.
> With scopes, we have to support a way to "scope" that entity with a 
URI.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/59#issuecomment-266276790>, or 
mute
> the thread
> 
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADwBfy2rMHVLF-NRVvk_z0xSL_FwbON-ks5rG97ngaJpZM4KoTXl>
> .
>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by stuartmyles
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/59#issuecomment-266330556 using your
 GitHub account

Received on Monday, 12 December 2016 02:35:08 UTC