Hi Renato,
thanks for this updated diagram.
Is there a way to show that the leftOperand and rightOperand of a Constraint may be a Constraint in a Compound Constraint – maybe by adding such selfreferential circles like for narrowerThan? Or more strict: do we need two subclasses of Constraint: AtomicConstraint and CompoundCounstraint, the second one with the selfreferencing operands?
Best,
Michael
From: Renato Iannella [mailto:renato.iannella@monegraph.com]
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 8:31 AM
To: POE WG <public-poe-wg@w3.org>
Subject: F2F - Updated Model
Dear all, after the F2F decisions:
1 - remove scopes and replace with constraints + individual/collection classes for Assets and Parties [1]
2 - introduce narrowerThan and alsoRequires for Actions/Assets/Parties [2]
The attached updated ODRL IM diagram is proposed. (comments welcome…)
(Note that one wide-reviewer has disagreed to the removal of the use of SKOS in the ODRL ontology [2] and points to its use in the Annotation Vocab [3].)
Renato
[1] https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/183
[2] https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/160
[3] https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-vocab/#extending-motivations
