- From: Michael Steidl via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:51:14 +0000
- To: public-poe-archives@w3.org
@riannella reply to "I'm slightly confused" above: The problem of the wording of this section is that is has to cover 2 steps of the evaluation: * A Duty has evaluation rules without considering consequences: all constraints are satisfied and the action is exercised --> fulfilled, if the action is not exercised: not fulfilled. I call this "evaluation step 1" below. * But that's not the end of the evaluation of a Duty **currently** in a not-fulfilled state: * if conseqence(s) exist it/they must be evaluated * if all are fulfilled the state of the Duty is changed from not-fulfilled to fulfilled The wording, also in the version of today (12 September), sounds like: both results, the one of the evaluation step 1 and the other one of the consequences, must be "fulfilled". But as consequences have only to be evaluated if the evaluation step 1 result is not-fulfilled this is a contradiction. I suggest this wording, based on the IM of 12 September: - there is also the obligation missing at the end of the first sentence. - the statement "or the Permission exercised without fulfilling the duty" is new. By what has been discussed so far a consequence applies only to not-fulfilling a Duty instance and not to a parenting Rule. **A duty of a Permission, and obligation of a Policy, may include a consequence Duty of not fulfilling that duty _or obligation_. In this case all consequence Duties must be fulfilled to set the final state of the Duty to fulfilled.** -- GitHub Notification of comment by nitmws Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/226#issuecomment-328756400 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 12 September 2017 06:51:08 UTC