- From: <benedict.whittamsmith@thomsonreuters.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:39:23 +0000
- To: <phila@w3.org>, <SMyles@ap.org>, <public-poe-wg@w3.org>
12:30 is fine by me. Ben > -----Original Message----- > From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org] > Sent: 24 October 2016 15:47 > To: Myles, Stuart; POE WG > Subject: Re: [Minutes] 2016-10-24 Incl. *Time change next week* > > Hi Stuart, > > I have carefully not used the term GMT as people often equate that with > London time. > > But bottom line, yes, we're suggesting a regular slot of 07:30 Eastern > from November - as that's better for you and Brian than the alternative > suggestion which was to leave it at 12:00 UTC which would make it 07:00 > for you. Brian said 07:30 was preferable to 07:00 (who would argue!). > Remember that for Renato... its late :-) > > I note your dislike of 07:30 EDT. Let's see what others say (there > weren't many on today' call). > > Phil. > > On 24/10/2016 15:02, Myles, Stuart wrote: > > Perhaps I am confused by my jet lag but weren't previous meetings on the > hour at noon GMT? For example, here is the meeting invite for Monday 05 > September 2016 - Noon GMT > > > > https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160905 > > > > A change to 12.30 UTC / 8.30 Eastern for next Monday works for me. But a > change to 11.30 UTC / 7.30am will be considerably harder for me to make the > telecons. > > > > Again, please forgive me if I've misunderstood / become confused. > > > > Regards, > > > > Stuart > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org] > > Sent: Monday, October 24, 2016 9:15 AM > > To: POE WG > > Subject: [Minutes] 2016-10-24 Incl. *Time change next week* > > > > Dear all, > > > > Predictably enough, the minutes of today's meeting are at > https://www.w3.org/2016/10/24-poe-minutes with a text snapshot below. > > Thanks to Simon for scribing. > > > > As Europe moves off daylight saving this weekend, and the USA follows suit > the following week, we talked about the call timing. End result, as of next > week, 31/10, the call will begin at *12:30 UTC*. > > > > In your time zone that's > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http- > 3A__www.timeanddate.com_worldclock_fixedtime.html-3Fmsg-3DRegular-2BPOE-2BWG- > 2BCall-26iso-3D20161031T1230-26p1-3D1440-26ah-3D1&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=o8Lxc5WZSytq > 2PDlaQfeLZDeZEBvWjdzkIyMtRtd3gU&e= > > > > For next week that means > > East coast: *08:30* > > UK: 12:30 > > CET: 13:30 > > Brisbane: 22:30 > > > > > > The following week, USA will have also ended DST and so the call will be at > 07:30 EDT. > > > > Hope that's OK with everyone. > > > > > > > > Permissions and Obligations Expression Working Group Teleconference > > > > 24 Oct 2016 > > > > See also: [2]IRC log > > > > [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/24-poe-irc > > > > Attendees > > > > Present > > renato, scribe, ivan, Serena, Brian_Ulicny, phila, Simon > > > > Regrets > > Stuart, Michael, Ben, Caroline, Victor > > > > Chair > > renato > > > > Scribe > > simonstey > > > > Contents > > > > * [3]Topics > > 1. [4]admin > > 2. [5]UC from BSIG > > 3. [6]POE.UC.28: Enhance discovery of library collection > > materials > > 4. [7]POE.UC.29 > > 5. [8]POE.UC.30 > > 6. [9]POE.UC.31 > > 7. [10]change of meeting time > > * [11]Summary of Action Items > > * [12]Summary of Resolutions > > __________________________________________________________ > > > > <scribe> scribe: simonstey > > > > admin > > > > renato: approval of last week's minutes > > > > [13]https://www.w3.org/2016/10/17-poe-minutes.html > > > > [13] https://www.w3.org/2016/10/17-poe-minutes.html > > > > <Brian_Ulicny> +1 > > > > <Serena> +1 > > > > scribe: no objections; minutes accepted > > > > UC from BSIG > > > > <renato> > > [14]https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- > 3A__docs.google.com_document_d_15nbqGY20IIGbTQOzKxzw59T&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLc > oWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=vDsGoOS_fhDh > OinGnaRkf0hKDDkMtCd32ruUq_bEFpo&e= > > LzwfPpRZu-1KKA97phKg/edit > > > > [14] > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- > 3A__docs.google.com_document_d_15nbqGY20IIGbTQOzKxzw59TLzwfPpRZu- > 2D1KKA97phKg_edit&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=OgRkIWjtalPC > uOMS0uwyzhBEmun2x77aC6fHcNoTCGU&e= > > > > renato: we got some UC from the book industry study group > > > > <phila> Happy, sure > > > > renato: we'll now go through them one by one > > > > <Serena> sure > > > > POE.UC.28: Enhance discovery of library collection materials > > > > UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: some req. read more like principles rather > > than actual requirements > > ... not sure what library-to-library licensing actually entails > > > > +q > > > > <phila> simonstey: Second what Phil said, this library to > > library case isn't special from our POV. You can define an > > agreement, one library is the assignee, one is the assigner > > etc. > > > > phila: one response is "this is already covered" and I think so > > too > > > > 22.1 -> already covered > > > > +q > > > > <Brian_Ulicny> +q > > > > <phila> simonstey: This could be a super valuable asset that > > you physically display but only for the case of someone to look > > at t, not to lend it out etc. > > > > Brian_Ulicny: not sure what "display for discovery" actually > > means > > > > renato: maybe we should ask them for some clarification > > > > 22.2 -> ask BISG for clarification > > > > <phila> simonstey: This is related too the grouping of assets? > > > > <phila> ... The chapters, graphs etc. > > > > renato: later on we have req. referring to breaking down the > > asset into individual parts > > > > 22.3 -> already satisfied (i.e. defning perm/.. for individual > > subcomponents and group them together in a policy) > > > > 22.4 -> already satisfied > > > > POE.UC.29 > > > > phila: that's potentially a bigger problem than just applying > > perm/prohibitions > > ... this I believe is a hot topic in digital publishing > > ... if you have an ID for your document, how are you > > identifying individual parts? > > > > ivan: I don't think this WG should try to invent something > > ... we should take whatever's already out there > > ... I think the issue here is whether this can be used for ODRL > > ... the gettyimage is a difficult example in that context > > ... if I have a resource, can I assign perm/proh to that > > resource > > ... and subsequently to parts of that resource too? > > > > renato: well.. partially > > ... we want to have something that allows us to define "parts" > > of an asset > > > > ivan: I have URI1 describing certain rights, URI2 describing > > some other rights > > ... can I say -> for everything that's not covered by URI1, > > look for it at URI2 > > > > renato: no, I don't think so > > > > phila: it is not easy to define such "default behavior/set of > > metadata", we did that in POWDER > > ... I think we are getting well beyond what this WG should do > > ... I'm not proposing POWDER as a solution, just wanted to > > mention it > > > > <Brian_Ulicny> +q > > > > +q > > > > ivan: from an ODRL point of view, structure isn't that > > important > > > > Brian_Ulicny: I think there are 2 issues here > > ... 1) whether rights of parts are communicated back to the > > whole > > > > <phila> simonstey: Regarding this issue of parts of a whole, > > applying things to the whole or parts... this is put here in > > the domain of libraries, but we also have it coming from TR. > > They boil down to this use case. > > > > ivan: I want to be a bit cautious about saying "just put a URI > > on it" > > ... I would not dismiss the fact that someones uses a blank > > node for describing a resource > > > > <phila> [15]POWDER eg > > > > [15] https://www.w3.org/TR/powder-dr/#eg2-6 > > > > phila: I keep talking about powder > > ... it's an example of a policy > > ... line 7 -> beginning of an audit list (dr = description > > resource) > > ... 1) IRI set 2) set of descriptors > > > > [phila explains example POWDER policy] > > > > <ivan> > > [16]https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http- > 3A__w3c.github.io_web-2Dannotation_selector-2Dnote_index- > 2Dres&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=LKdhHbovu6Om > aqPGgCA_MIZaPrZkx93DzspJMBROf2c&e= > > pec.html > > > > [16] > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__w3c.github.io_web- > 2Dannotation_selector-2Dnote_index-2Drespec.html&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=hduW5zE8POrz > rB7HQ3CWAHSJvQDkox8UmC0TaPw81C8&e= > > > > ivan: that's the document I was referring to > > ... section 3 the selectors > > > > <ivan> > > [17]https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http- > 3A__w3c.github.io_web-2Dannotation_selector-2Dnote_index- > 2Dres&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=LKdhHbovu6Om > aqPGgCA_MIZaPrZkx93DzspJMBROf2c&e= > > pec.html#TextQuoteSelector_def > > > > [17] > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__w3c.github.io_web- > 2Dannotation_selector-2Dnote_index-2Drespec.html-23TextQuoteSelector- > 5Fdef&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=LHa1- > GxeM3GcJBdB403_mDEHaWYAzNfZ5ZlbGQd_X8Q&e= > > > > ivan: an example expressed in JSON defining sections of a > > document > > ... this (or a combination for that matter) is able to define > > specific parts of a document > > ... what the rec. behind that doesn't have is URIs for it > > > > <ivan> > > [18]https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http- > 3A__w3c.github.io_web-2Dannotation_selector-2Dnote_index- > 2Dres&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=LKdhHbovu6Om > aqPGgCA_MIZaPrZkx93DzspJMBROf2c&e= > > pec.html#json-examples-converted-to-fragment-identifiers > > > > [18] > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__w3c.github.io_web- > 2Dannotation_selector-2Dnote_index-2Drespec.html-23json-2Dexamples- > 2Dconverted-2Dto-2Dfragment-2Didentifiers&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=QyWpUZyqrQOs > QvvlL3B7IzgFynGTzpgkkHkiylXC5ng&e= > > > > ivan: here you do get URIs (ugly ones though) > > ... I don't know whether it's possible for ODRL to define > > perms/prohi. for something that's defined like that > > > > renato: you are talking about example 6 of the first link > > you've posted? > > ... I recall that we've a req. that requires to be able to > > define constraints on assets too > > > > <ivan> > > [19]https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http- > 3A__w3c.github.io_web-2Dannotation_selector-2Dnote_index- > 2Dres&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=LKdhHbovu6Om > aqPGgCA_MIZaPrZkx93DzspJMBROf2c&e= > > pec.html#SelectorRefinement_def > > > > [19] > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__w3c.github.io_web- > 2Dannotation_selector-2Dnote_index-2Drespec.html-23SelectorRefinement- > 5Fdef&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=kjtJv_yl0p9h > 4Eys2gqrv-NssB0mSlU04bzrAAcoUOk&e= > > > > ivan: yes, it could be seen as constraint on a URI > > > > [renato & ivan talking about possible realization in ODRL] > > > > renato: we'll ask them to give us some clarification > > > > 23.6/7 -> implementation specific > > > > 23.1-5 -> ask BISG for clarification > > > > POE.UC.30 > > > > ivan: 24.3 refers to the fact that certain publishers may > > provide free "samples" of their books > > ... but this would then actually result in two different assets > > > > +q > > > > <phila> simonstey: I don't think we can enumerate all the > > possible purposes > > > > renato: long long time ago we had something like "subscription" > > > > <Serena> I agree with Simon > > > > <phila> simonstey: I think the fact that we can add time to > > permissions etc. means ODRL covers these use cases > > > > POE.UC.31 > > > > 25.1 -> supported using grantUse/nextPolicy > > > > 24.1-24.5 -> covered, need some investigation though > > > > change of meeting time > > > > <phila> phila: Will circulate new time of 12:30 UTC which, in > > UTC terms, is half an hour later than the current meeting time, > > but will be half an hour earlier on northern hemisphere > > calendars after DST ends > > > > Summary of Action Items > > > > Summary of Resolutions > > > > [End of minutes] > > __________________________________________________________ > > > > -- > > > Phil Archer > W3C Data Activity Lead > http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http- > 3A__philarcher.org&d=CwICaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk- > GVjSLm9hvvvzvGv0FLoWSRuCSs5Q&r=GQ6xvz2BG1vCgiGGeLHdL1qJLbLUqYG6W19eFBlznzDGH3w > jzyriGVJemENTKsgx&m=77M2UyIOEzoLcpwf4E38QoV5uQ5pMRVe2OrsEmu6LxY&s=wDKnA0nLxao0 > I_A-lGscKTqU3BhYOQeGGM2oU0bptFM&e= > +44 (0)7887 767755 > @philarcher1
Received on Monday, 24 October 2016 15:40:01 UTC