[poe] Issue: Actions (Permission/Prohibition and Duty) - editorial issues marked as To Be Closed

riannella has just labeled an issue for https://github.com/w3c/poe as "To Be Closed":

== Actions (Permission/Prohibition and Duty) - editorial issues ==
Going over the definitions of Actions for Permission-Prohibition and for Duty in Vocab Editor's Draft I see these issues should be solved, correcting typos and minimal changes are not included. It covers also the raised issue of the use of RFC2119. (TOC numbers are based on the Vocab Editor's Draft of 11 May)

Permission-Prohibition 
* Use (4.12.1): remove "the" in Note: ... by **the** narrower actions.
* Archive (4.12.6) change Note to: Temporal constraints may be used for temporal conditions
* Semantics of Distribute (4.12.11), Move (4.12.18) and Reproduce (4.12.23): quite clear is Move: the (only) copy of the asset goes from A to B, nothing remains at A. Reproduce covers only making a copy of the asset but nothing about the use of this copy. If the use of the copy should be defined by another constraint we would tell that in a Note. (Practical note: is a realistic to define a constraint for such a common action like creating a copy? I guess not Assignee can guarantee that the provided digital asset will only be moved and never copied.) And what exactly is Distribute? Something like moving a reproduced copy from A to B (or many Bs)? These three actions need reconciled semantics.
* Modify (4.12.17) Definition ... to update existing content ... : "updating" is a specific purpose of modifying digital data - it is more constraining than "modify" on its own. I suggest to replace it by "change".
* Translate (4.12.29) explains in the Note that a "new derivative Asset" is created. By that I suggest to make Translate a narrower term of Derive.

Duty

* Compensate (4.14.3) Definition: "... for use of the Asset". ODRL actions vocab has two top concepts: "use" (= for a licensed use) and "transfer" (for handing over ownership) with "give" (for free) and "sell" as narrower concepts. Therefore I suggest: "... for using **or selling** of the Asset"
* Delete (4.13.4.): The semantics leave it open WHEN the copies have to be removed in a generic way like "... of the Asset after it has been used". And the Notes must say "... the Asset must be deleted." as this is required by the definition.
* Obtain Consent (4.14.9): the definition should outline how the consent should be obtained, the current definition could be interpreted as wide open but then it is also unclear and could be interpreted differently easily.
* Uninstall (4.14.11): The semantics leave it open WHEN the program has to be uninstalled. Should have a similar Note as Delete. 
* Watermark (4.14.12) - Note: embed a link to what - and how??



See https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/178

Received on Tuesday, 6 June 2017 06:33:25 UTC