Re: [poe] Clarify inheritance and over-riden entities

> Michael's comment was inheritRelation does not have to an ODRL Policy - it can point to a written agreement between the two parties (that is what happens in the IPTC community)
Yes, inheritRelation changes the processing landscape.
**But the point is, if you see it and don't understand it, then you proceed at your own risk...**

It's not that easy though.. 
if implementations want to conform with the standard, they have to implement (i.e., correctly deal with) all normative features of respective standard. 

So if an ODRL implementation wants to process a policy (containing an `inheritRelation`) in a standard-conform manner, what needs to be done?

Considering following (non-normative) example:

> For example, an Assigner and Assignee may have a historical arrangement related to the specific use of content they make available to each other. The business model (identified with a URI) is used in the inheritRelation attribute in their subsequent ODRL Policies they exchange. **This will require the ODRL Policy to be interpreted with the additional information identified by the URI.** For example, this may include additional permission Actions or constraints (etc) that is documented in their business model arrangement.

plus ->

> Michael's comment was **inheritRelation does not have to an ODRL Policy - it can point to a written agreement between the two parties** (that is what happens in the IPTC community)

would require implementations to do NLP so they can properly interpret the policy?

coming back to:
> But the point is, if you see it and don't understand it, then you proceed at your own risk...

if it's ok for implementations to simply ignore that property, then why have it in the first place?

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by simonstey
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/22#issuecomment-290622287 using your GitHub account

Received on Friday, 31 March 2017 05:49:07 UTC