Re: [poe] On 2.6.8 Rule Active State Processing

>  I claim: without having set a reference value for each of the LeftOperands (requiring one - most of the ones in the Common vocabulary do so) of the constraints in a Rule **it is impossible to evaluate even only the Active state of a Rule.**

ODRL doesn't specify **how** constraints have to be evaluated.. and since the individual semantics of leftOperands are defined as natural language text only, you won't be able to achieve interoperability wrt. to constraint evaluation anyway.

> Further: Rules can be evaluated without checking assignee and/or target - but this could result in useless Rule outcomes and will be considered as squandering time and effort.


>    the mandatory target should be included
>    the optional assignee should be included if it exists
>    the assigner may be included
>    all constraints must be included
>    **All of them have to be evaluated** against reference values set by the Evaluator (and the party running it) for a specific evaluation.

that's too restrictive, as it is only relevant for certain use cases. 

> Terminology note: the policies in UC3 we should not be tested for "is the policy valid" but "does the policy have conflicts" 
> If an ODRL **processor** (sic!) does not detect any conflicts in the Rules, then **the ODRL Policy is valid**, otherwise the ODRL processor MUST follow these ODRL validation requirements:
>    If a Policy has the conflict property of perm then any conflicting Permission Rule MUST override the Prohibition Rule and continue with the Policy as valid.

=> so even though a policy might have conflicts, it can be valid

GitHub Notification of comment by simonstey
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 31 August 2017 10:20:41 UTC