- From: Renato Iannella via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2017 01:04:15 +0000
- To: public-poe-archives@w3.org
Re 2.7 Policy Rule Composition: Now 1: Semantic issue 1a/1b: - removed that sentence (left over from before it was made into two sections) Now 2: fixed Now 3: fixed Re 2.7.1 Compact Policy Now 1: If you leave them there - then that creates duplicates, and may mean that your repeat the same process over again, And it does not help when you create atomic policies. They are just "removed" by an ODRL processor. Now2: we don't say why or where you should use compact policies, only that they should be transformed into atomic for conformance/exchange (Recommended=Should="may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item") A compact policy, with an assigner property at the policy-level, for example, does not reflect the IM model (only a Rule can have an assigner). -- GitHub Notification of comment by riannella Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/215#issuecomment-321123153 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 9 August 2017 01:04:15 UTC