Re: [poe] Reviews of ODRL Vocabulary ... - Editor's Draft 3 August 2017

Re Common Vocabulary - https://w3c.github.io/poe/vocab/#vocab-common

This section 4 reflects now that it holds terms which may be used by ODRL profiles.
In other words: these are terms which have been (well) defined by ODRL 2.1 and can still be used - the only required step is to adopt such a term for a profile.
But why are Creative Commons terms part of this Common Vocabulary? These terms are already defined by Creative Commons and don't need to be defined again. And a profile could adopt a mix of ODRL Common Vocab and Creative Commons terms as it likes.

Having a look into the ODRL22.ttl of 3 August shows:
```
<http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/#actions>
    a skos:Collection ;
    skos:prefLabel "Actions for Rules"@en ;
    skos:member :use ;
    skos:member :transfer .

<http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/#actionsCommon>
    a skos:Collection ;
    skos:prefLabel "Actions for Rules"@en ;
    skos:member :acceptTracking ;
    skos:member :aggregate ;
...
```  
The IRI of these vocabs make only a minimal distinction between Core and Common and the prefLabel no distinction at all.
As the difference between Core and Common is essential this should be reflected in the TTL too, e.g.
```
<http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/#actionsCore>
    a skos:Collection ;
    skos:prefLabel "Actions of the ODRL Information Model for Rules"@en ;
    skos:member :use ;
    skos:member :transfer .

<http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/#actionsCommon>
    a skos:Collection ;
    skos:prefLabel "Non-normative common actions for Rules which may be adopted by ODRL profiles."@en ;
    skos:member :acceptTracking ;
    skos:member :aggregate ;
...
```  

The same applies to Policy Subclasses, Party Function, Left Operands, Right Operands.

<hr>

** Re 3.13.1 Constraint 
Now: A boolean expression that refines the applicability of a Rule.
Should be: A boolean expression that refines the applicability of a Rule, or Party/Asset Collection.

** Re 3.13.2 Has Constraint
Now: Constraints applied to a Rule
Should be: Constraints applied to a Rule, or Party/Asset Collection
Now: One or more Constraints may be applied to a Rule.
Should be: One or more Constraints may be applied.

** Re 3.14.1 Logical Constraint
Now: A logical expression that refines the applicability of a Rule.
Issue: may a Logical Constraint be applied to Party/Asset Collection too? (The IM says no clear yes or no)

** Re 3.14.2 Operand
Sub-properties: andSequence is missing.

** Re 3.16.4 And Sequence
Class is defined as Operator - should be the Logical Constraint Operand 3.14.2




-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by nitmws
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/216#issuecomment-320725551 using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 7 August 2017 17:20:50 UTC