- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2017 20:16:10 +0800
- To: public-poe-wg@w3.org, Sabrina Kirrane <sabrina.kirrane@wu.ac.at>
- Message-ID: <aea8f280-6802-490b-9a8c-2734120387fb@Spark>
I do not think you would want me on Monday… I arrive back from Australia 7am Amsterdam time, and I do not think that, after a 24 hours’ travel, I would be able to say anything even remotely intelligent… It seems that Tuesday midday would work for everyone. Let us keep to that. 11am Amsterdam/Vienna/Madrid time? My hotel network is atrocious; no way I could set up a call on webex (I hope this mail will be sent…). Phil, could you do it? Cheers Ivan --- Ivan Herman World Wide Web Consortium Publishing@W3C Technical Lead http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ ORCID: 0000-0003-0782-2704 On 2 Apr 2017, 16:06 +0800, Sabrina Kirrane <sabrina.kirrane@wu.ac.at>, wrote: > Before midday on Monday and Tuesday works for me. > > Regards, > Sabrina > > On 01/04/2017 10:30, Víctor Rodríguez Doncel wrote: > > > > Fine for me on Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday morning. > > Thursday and Friday are off for me (Eastern). > > > > Víctor > > > > El 31/03/2017 19:01, Ivan Herman escribió: > > > On Fri, March 31, 2017 9:27 am, Simon Steyskal wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > Go ahead without me. I will not be available until the 11th, and there > > > > > is no reason to wait for me. I can always comment on the outcome using > > > > > the usual channels… > > > > I think it makes more sense to just postpone the call such that all of > > > > us can participate. After the 11th, when are you available again Ivan? > > > I am back home on Monday the 10th, and I am available for the rest of > > > the week, modulo other calls. > > > > > > Are all potential participants from Europe? Or Europe and Australia? > > > Because if so, we can also schedule a call before > > > lunch on Wed or Thursday, for example; that may be easier. > > > > > > Ivan > > > > > > > > > > br simon > > > > > > > > Am 2017-03-31 10:07, schrieb Ivan Herman: > > > > > > On 31 Mar 2017, at 09:00, VÃctor RodrÃguez Doncel > > > > > > <vrodriguez@fi.upm.es> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > I see we cannot set a call with more than two participants. > > > > > > Shall we start speak speaking in a first call Simon and I and then in > > > > > > a second call with Ivan? > > > > > > Ivan when are you available? > > > > > > > > > > > Go ahead without me. I will not be available until the 11th, and there > > > > > is no reason to wait for me. I can always comment on the outcome using > > > > > the usual channels… > > > > > > > > > > Ivan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > VÃctor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El 27/03/2017 a las 18:32, VÃctor RodrÃguez Doncel escribió: > > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have created a doodle poll to see when can we meet to discuss the > > > > > > > scope and ambition of the formal semantics note. Link: > > > > > > > https://beta.doodle.com/poll/ricy6h4iha3b5s4z > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have set a fixed time (12.30 GMT) and several different days trying > > > > > > > to concile the different constraints you have emailed already. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > VÃctor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El 27/03/2017 a las 15:35, Phil Archer escribió: > > > > > > > > As ever, the minutes of today's meeting are at > > > > > > > > https://www.w3.org/2017/03/27-poe-minutes with a text snapshot > > > > > > > > below. Thanks Michael for scribing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Main topic today was Sabrina's new use case of modelling the GDPR > > > > > > > > using a profile of ODRL. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Permissions and Obligations Expression Working Group > > > > > > > > Teleconference > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 27 March 2017 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [2]Agenda [3]IRC log > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [2] https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20170327 > > > > > > > > [3] http://www.w3.org/2017/03/27-poe-irc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Attendees > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Present > > > > > > > > benws, benws110, ivan, michaelS, phila, renato, Sabrina, > > > > > > > > Serena, smyles, victor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regrets > > > > > > > > Brian, Caroline, Simon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chair > > > > > > > > Ben > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scribe > > > > > > > > michaelS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Contents > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * [4]Meeting Minutes > > > > > > > > 1. [5]Last week's minutes > > > > > > > > 2. [6]New Use Case > > > > > > > > 3. [7]Deliverables > > > > > > > > 4. [8]best practices > > > > > > > > 5. [9]open Actions > > > > > > > > 6. [10]London F2F > > > > > > > > * [11]Summary of Action Items > > > > > > > > * [12]Summary of Resolutions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meeting Minutes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <benws110> nick benws > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <victor> hi all > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <renato> hi victor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > scribe michaelS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Last week's minutes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: anybody want to raise an issue with last week's minutes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <phila> [NOTUC] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <phila> [13]Last week's minutes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [13] https://www.w3.org/2017/03/20-poe-minutes.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Resolved: last week's minutes approved > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <renato> [14]https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/ > > > > > > > > Use_Cases#POE.UC.37_Representing_regulations_using_ODRL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [14] > > > > > > > > https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases#POE.UC.37_Representing_regulations_using_ODRL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > New Use Case > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: introduced the Use Case > > > > > > > > … it models the EU General Data Protection Regulation > > > > > > > > … it needs to cover that at a generic level but also in details > > > > > > > > … Article 12 added as an example > > > > > > > > … this article shows the important use of references to other > > > > > > > > articles > > > > > > > > … the numbering of the articles has at least two levels > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: any comments on that so far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: does this requirement belong to a profile or to the > > > > > > > > general ODRL model? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: this is a decision by this group > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: what does "refer to another article" mean? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: that are dependencies - look at Article 12. This may > > > > > > > > transform to many duties. > > > > > > > > … to check if Article 12 is fullfilled the fulfillment of other > > > > > > > > articles is required > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phila: GDPR is very important it would be a big PR win if ODRL > > > > > > > > could show that it can cover it. > > > > > > > > … key question: is ODRL is a good tool for that purpose. > > > > > > > > Sabrina do you feel that? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: ODRL is not a bad fit. We need to specify obligations > > > > > > > > and constraints > > > > > > > > … There is work on taxonomies by other parties but less > > > > > > > > fitting. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: we could promote this as a profile. This would serve to > > > > > > > > explain how to create a profile > > > > > > > > … and this profile could be shown to a wide audience. > > > > > > > > … the relationships between the constraints and duties is > > > > > > > > demandingö > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: we have dependencies between the duties, we have > > > > > > > > constraints on duties, actions and parties > > > > > > > > … supported to create a profile for that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: to show that we could express regulations and licences > > > > > > > > by the same language would be fine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phila: supported using ODRL for this purpose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: we are basically defining obligiations = duties = > > > > > > > > complying with the regulations > > > > > > > > … if we run into problems we will come back to this group > > > > > > > > … when it comes to constraints: there are discretational ones > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smyles: suggested to model optional constraints as permissions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: that's not exactly the intention of the GDPR > > > > > > > > … there are statements like a recommendation - and we don't > > > > > > > > want to omit them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: is thinking what this could look like in code: > > > > > > > > leftOperand say you may or may not use an icon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: need for a discretional constraint: it would be good > > > > > > > > to meet this constraint but it doesn't stop the policy > > > > > > > > … if it is not met > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: for her and Simon some constraints a bit fuzzy, needs > > > > > > > > deeper reviews > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smyles: we may add a concept of recommendation = if you can, > > > > > > > > you should do that > > > > > > > > … there could be levels of recommendation: strongly recommended > > > > > > > > ... and more > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: will review this suggestion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <renato> [15]https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [15] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <phila> The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", > > > > > > > > "SHALL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <phila> NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <phila> "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as > > > > > > > > described in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <phila> RFC 2119. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > phila: RFC2119 is a standard specifying things like that - > > > > > > > > could help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: Dispensation = something is required, but there is a > > > > > > > > dispensation under specific condiditions. > > > > > > > > … and some articles say "you are not allowed" others say > > > > > > > > "unless party X allows that" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <victor> Dispensation: a : an exemption from a law or from an > > > > > > > > impediment, vow, or oath may be granted a dispensation from the > > > > > > > > rule b : a formal authorization requested a dispensation to > > > > > > > > form another lodge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: in fact: an exception on an exception > > > > > > > > … may also be used > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: went over some more details of transforming DGPR into > > > > > > > > ODRL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > victor: thinks like that can be expressed by ODRL. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: we are looking not only at GDPR but also legal > > > > > > > > regulations in general - is the existing ODRL data model work > > > > > > > > for us > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: what are "features" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > victor: we could think about synonyms for hardwired constraints > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: two more things: "Feature" = article 12 has various > > > > > > > > obligations, some are well defined, some don't stand on their > > > > > > > > own. > > > > > > > > … we are looking at conjunctions and disjunctions in this > > > > > > > > context > > > > > > > > … transparency is the conjunction of all of them - we call them > > > > > > > > Features at the moment > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: we need additional constraints on the asset - they > > > > > > > > will span across multiple duties > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: ODRL scope could work > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: agreed > > > > > > > > … we have an issue with the type of processing - e.g. how > > > > > > > > personal data may be used for marketing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smyles: the purpose is to define the nature of a party - right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: yes, depending on who you are rules may apply > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smyles: why not to split up in constraints for group A and > > > > > > > > group B of persons > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smyles: wondered if inheritance could be used > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: the controllers for different purposes are different > > > > > > > > … we look at what's there and then will come back to this group > > > > > > > > … the Wiki space could be used for discussions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: timeline? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: there are different groups of work: e.g. transforming > > > > > > > > the article and the sub-points - but that's not very usable. > > > > > > > > … in a next step obligations have to be pulled out of the > > > > > > > > articles - and that's a big work, will take months. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: does this timeline align with the ODRL timeline? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: yes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: do we need a new policy type "regulation"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sabrina: yes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: supported to use Wikipages for working on the > > > > > > > > transformation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Deliverables > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <renato> [16]https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Deliverables > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [16] https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Deliverables > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: went over [17]https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/ > > > > > > > > Deliverables > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [17] https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Deliverables > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <renato> [18]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ > > > > > > > > public-poe-comments/2017Mar/0012.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [18] > > > > > > > > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-poe-comments/2017Mar/0012.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: we got a reply from EDRLabs > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <renato> [19]https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/118 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [19] https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/118 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: raised some concerns regarding periods > > > > > > > > … this needs an update of the definitions of date/time and > > > > > > > > period constraints > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: re Horizontal reviews: > > > > > > > > … any news from Brian? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: has sent a reminder > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: reviews seem to be on track > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: refered to a proposoal of Victor to hold a special > > > > > > > > meeting > > > > > > > > … = a call > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: asked Victor to launch a Doodgle survey for finding date > > > > > > > > and time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best practices > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: tried to reach out to James from Catapult, but the email > > > > > > > > did not work > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > open Actions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: only 3 on the issue tracker > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <phila> s/RESOLVED: last week's minutes approved// > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <renato> [20]https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/114 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [20] https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/114 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > London F2F > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: open issue is providing hotel rooms at TR rates - but > > > > > > > > Sabrina may have an alternative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > victor: would appreciate to have times for the agenda items > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bens: starting time 10am - ok? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renato: agenda will be based on requests from group members and > > > > > > > > currently ongoing work > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <ivan> will there be possibiltiies for dial in? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: suggested 5:30pm as closing time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <ivan> thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: it will be possible to dial in too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: AOB? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benws: none was raised - bye > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Summary of Action Items > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Summary of Resolutions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. [21]last week's minutes approved > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > VÃctor RodrÃguez-Doncel > > > > > > D3205 - Ontology Engineering Group (OEG) > > > > > > Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial > > > > > > ETS de Ingenieros Informáticos > > > > > > Universidad Politécnica de Madrid > > > > > > > > > > > > Campus de Montegancedo s/n > > > > > > Boadilla del Monte-28660 Madrid, Spain > > > > > > Tel. (+34) 91336 3753 > > > > > > Skype: vroddon3 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---- > > > > > Ivan Herman, W3C > > > > > Publishing@W3C Technical Lead > > > > > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > > > > > mobile: +31-641044153 > > > > > ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > > --- > > > > DDipl.-Ing. Simon Steyskal > > > > Institute for Information Business, WU Vienna > > > > > > > > www: http://www.steyskal.info/ twitter: @simonsteys > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Postdoctoral researcher, > Institute for Information Business and > Institute for Management Information Systems, > Vienna University of Economics and Business > Tel: +43-1-31336-4494 > E-mail: sabrina.kirrane [at] wu.ac.at >
Received on Sunday, 2 April 2017 12:19:03 UTC