Re: FW: POE/ODRL: suggested rephrasing of 2.6.8

the suggested rewording has to be discussed with the wg on monday before it should be applied to the IM
simon
-------- Original message --------From: "Michael Steidl (IPTC)" <mdirector@iptc.org> Date: 9/2/17  07:57  (GMT+01:00) To: 'Renato Iannella' <r@iannel.la> Cc: 'Simon Steyskal' <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at> Subject: FW: POE/ODRL: suggested rephrasing of 2.6.8 
Hi Renato,deeper view done, see https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/240 Good luck with merging all these issues into the IM – and Vocab. Best,Michael From: Michael Steidl (IPTC) [mailto:mdirector@iptc.org] 
Sent: Friday, September 1, 2017 6:57 PM
To: 'Renato Iannella' <r@iannel.la>; 'Simon Steyskal' <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>
Subject: RE: POE/ODRL: suggested rephrasing of 2.6.8 Hi Renato,while going over 2.10 I noticed a confusing use of the term “valid” and its variants – see https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/237At first sight I didn’t get aware of impacts of 2.6.8 on 2.10 and vice versa.I only have time for a deeper view on Saturday, right now my guests for tonight’s dinner have been ringing on the door. Best,Michael From: Renato Iannella [mailto:r@iannel.la] 
Sent: Friday, September 1, 2017 1:29 PM
To: Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org>; Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@wu.ac.at>
Subject: Re: POE/ODRL: suggested rephrasing of 2.6.8  On 1 Sep 2017, at 18:54, Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org> wrote: How do you want to proceed as Ben said yesterday he wants to create Truth Table over the weekend – and 2.6.8 should define how their values are generated. Send him (direct) the updated google doc? Also - can you please both review the wording of https://w3c.github.io/poe/model/#conflictand make sure you are all ok with that in light of section 2.6.8 R PS: i wanted to clear *all* issues this weekend ;-)