Re: narrowerThan leftOperands

> On 5 Jun 2017, at 18:39, Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org> wrote:
> 
> First about the semantics of narrowerThan: its current specification in the Information Model is “The narrowerThan property defines vertical relationships between Actions, and the implies property defines horizontal relationships between Actions.”


(BTW, we, so far, defined NarrowerThan as "Action has narrower operational semantics than another Action” [1]

I think that we should not use “narrow” as part of the name/definition of this property. 
As that puts the wrong emphasis on the term (and confuses/conflicts with skos).

The purpose of this property is to say that an Action is a subpart (or "belongs to") another Action and hence, there is a direct implication between them in the sense that the latter encompasses the former *and* (depending on the semantics of the Rule) may be in conflict with other actions.

So the focus is not so much on the hierarchy, but on the relationship between two actions (one is included in the other) *and* the implication that this may lead to (such as a conflict) in certain Rules.

I suggest we rename this property odrl:includedIn, such as:

   odrl:stream odrl:includedIn odrl:use

And update the definitions/narrative as per above.

(and similar update for odrl:implies)

I still think we can use skos for each *individual* term (which, as has been pointed out) we actually are required to do (since we us skos:definition etc).

But we use our properties for relationships *between* terms (that has our precise operational semantics).


Renato Iannella, Monegraph
Co-Chair, W3C Permissions & Obligations Expression (POE) Working Group

[1] https://w3c.github.io/poe/vocab/#term-narrowerThan <https://w3c.github.io/poe/vocab/#term-narrowerThan>