- From: Renato Iannella via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 00:55:17 +0000
- To: public-poe-archives@w3.org
1) The naming of xml entities was designed to fit the most flexible model in that most "elements" will be URIs (defined by the ontology). So that is why we have the "function" attribute and the values can be "...odrl/2/assignee" etc. This then means anyone can have any URI as the functional role and you don't need to modify the XML Schema to add any new elements or attribute values. The XML serialisations becomes a framework to plugin the ODRL URIs. There is not need to serialise the Rule class as it never explicitly appears in serialisations (not even turtle/json-ld) 2) No reason. At the time, the root element had a capital P ;-) 3) This is a limitation on the XML Schema cardinality mechanism. There is no way to effectively say that out of the 6 possible elements, that "one of two must appear". I've added a comment. (implementors may use schematron for additional validation) 4) Fixed, now URI or IDREF 5) See 3) above 6) We support multiple values for operators like isAnyOf Basic Q: The XML Schema is the "best fit" for the ODRL model (nothing will be perfect) Sub-question: yes, me ;-) V2.2 is a superset of V2.1 commit: c8cb4c4669e83a906484332746c904fbe8e7dd1c -- GitHub Notification of comment by riannella Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/197#issuecomment-309932042 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 21 June 2017 00:55:23 UTC