[poe] Issue: Mild contradictions in IM wrt validation marked as Editorial

vroddon has just labeled an issue for https://github.com/w3c/poe as "Editorial":

== Mild contradictions in IM wrt validation ==
In IM 2.1.2:

> An ODRL Policy of subclass Offer: [...] must have one assigner property value (of type Party)

...is in mild contradiction with what is said in "Section 2.7 Policy Rule Composition". 
At first the ODRL Validator validated that Offer had to have exactly one assigner, now it accepts several more because the expansion is automatically made. Perhaps that sentence (and equivalent ones affecting asset, action and assignees) in other parts of the spec have to be rethought.

The problem would solved by adding the word "atomic":
> An **atomic** ODRL Policy of subclass Offer: [...] must have one assigner property value (of type Party)

But then we would need to define first what atomic is etc. Unsure, perhaps it is better not changing anything.

See https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/252

Received on Friday, 8 September 2017 18:40:51 UTC