[poe] 3.1 Policy

simonstey has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/poe:

== 3.1 Policy ==
> The Policy entity contains the following attributes:

-> A Policy has following attributes: 

> uid: the unique identification of the Policy entity (REQUIRED)

s/uid/id to align it with [json-ld's node 
  `the unique id ..` e.g., OWL does not adhere to the [UNA 
](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_name_assumption) -> s/the 
unique identification of/an identifier of ? 

> type: **indicates the semantics** of the Policy entity (REQUIRED). 

which trivially applies to all attributes of any of the concepts.. 
s/semantics/specific type 

> These are further described in the ODRL vocabulary [vocab-odrl] and 
ODRL Profiles.

I would also include that description, i.e., explanation of the diff. 
between different policy types, in the info model. remove `and ODRL 

> The uid attribute MUST be a unique identifier.

see above comment.. btw. why mentioning this here explicitely, but not
 in any of the other sections?

> This value MAY also impose further constraints on the Information 

on what? this document? what's the IM of a specific policy? 
constraints as in ODRL constraints?

> It is important that the type attribute be clearly understood in 
policy expressions as the semantics MAY impose restrictions on the 
expression language constructs such as cardinalities between entities.

clearly understood by whom? only the type attribute itself or its 
values? how does one verify *clear understanding*? It's already 
mentioned that different types may impose additional constraints, so 
why reiterate it here again?  

> For example, the ODRL Agreement Policy Type stipluates that it must 
contain two Parties (an Assigner and Assignee).

what's `it`? the policy type itself? a policy of type agreement? 
exactly 2? >= 2? what does `contain two Parties` mean? if a policy 
refers to 1000 different rules and only 1 refers to an assigner and 
only 1 other rule to an assignee, does this satisfy the agreement 
requirement? if not, why? 

> A Policy of type Set states that the Asset 
http//example.com/asset:9898 is the target of ..

any policy of type set? or only the one in example 1?

> the Permission read and the Prohibition reproduce. 

is the permission called read? -> the permission to perform action 
read on asset ...

> Two Parties are involved, namely the Assigner of the Permissions and
 the Party to be attributed.


"@context": {
    "odrl": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/"

all examples are missing a colon after `}` ->

"@context": {
    "odrl": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/"

Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/96 using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 30 January 2017 06:47:09 UTC