- From: Michael Steidl via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 12:16:40 +0000
- To: public-poe-archives@w3.org
This issue is also covered by #267 The problem in the background is: the current definition of when consequences have to be executed and only their fulfilment has an impact on the state of the Duty (in https://w3c.github.io/poe/model/#duty) . But a description of the consequence property further down in this section raises the need for an also fulfilled original Duty. At the call on 25 September it was requested to make this "both must be fulfilled" the standard. I suggest the WG considers what would go wrong if we stick to the approach of the top definition of Duty: fulfilled consequences are sufficient to set the Duty state to fulfilled, the action of the main Duty has not impact on that anymore. (My more business oriented view: after not having exercised the action of the main Duty, the consequences must be fulfilled. This sounds like a common business rule. But having to exercise the action of the main Duty AND having to fulfil the consequences will be overarching for assignees.) -- GitHub Notification of comment by nitmws Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/275#issuecomment-333110701 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 29 September 2017 12:16:30 UTC