[Odrl-version2] Updated Vocab

[ri at odrl.net]

Thanks Steven - great feedback which we will incorporate in the next update....

R


On 28 May 2010, at 07:15, Steven Rowat wrote:

> ri at odrl.net wrote: > New release of updated Vocab working draft: > > http://odrl.net/2.0/WD-ODRL-Vocab-20100527.html
> 
> I have had little ODRL v.2 involvement for over a year, for a variety of reasons. This has allowed me to approach this document, to some degree, as if I'm a new user reading it for the first time. For this reason I'm noting all my problems with it, no matter how seemingly trivial.
> 
> And the fact that I'm resorting to the seemingly trivial is also an indication of how fundamentally complete the document is; nonetheless I think it has reached the point where even these need to be addressed, because new readers, more than re-drafters, require that such attention-distractors not get in the way of understanding what the document is really about.
> 
> General Problem:
> 
> Use of the [RFC-2119] modifiers "MUST" "SHOULD" etc. is not clear to me in two ways:
> 
> a): Is capitalization required or not? (Note that "MAY" is capitalized once, "MUST" twice; the rest not). I believe this needs to be spelled out in the document, because the [RFC-2119] itself is not clear on whether capitalization is required; it only says: "...These words are often capitalized."
> 
> b): is the word "can" used throughout synonymous with "MAY" of the [RFC-2119]? If so, I believe the document should note this, or should use "MAY" instead of 'can' in all cases.
> 
> Suggestion for [RFC-2119] modifiers: What I think would read best and be the most easily understandable would be to have the capitalization declared as not necessary for this document, and simply don't use it at all. However, if this is done, then all other 'must' and 'may' uses have to be checked carefully because they will be [RFC-2119] uses by default.
> 
> 2.0 ODRL Common Vocabulary
> 
> Singular and plural do not seem to match in this sentence:
> 
> "The table[s] below outline[s] the comprehensive version 2.0 ODRL Common Vocabulary."
> 
> Suggestion: Possibly this sentence can be read (using some mental gymnastics) as technically correct, but really I think the meaning would be clearer using: "The table[s] below outline[] the comprehensive…etc."
> 
> 2.1: Rights Types
> 
> Table:
> 
> The Semantics and Comments fields are inconsistent in whether they are punctuated with a final period. In two cases they are (Set and Ticket Comment), in the rest they are not. I suggest that, in this table at least, since some of the texts have multiple sentences and the first sentences are using full punctuation (see the Offer and Request Comments, and others), then it is odd to leave off the final period on the next sentence. So I feel it would be best to use a final period in all the Semantics and Comment sentences.
> 
> 2.2.1 Permissions and Prohibitions
> 
> In the Table:
> 
> a) As in previous table, the final period is inconsistent in Semantics and Comments. I suggest again adding it in all cases. Or at very least, since many fields are very short, adding it in cases where there are multiple sentences.
> 
> b) Annotate, Comment: Now reads: "A new asset is created". This sentence confused me here the first time I encountered it (though later when I saw it several times in other places, I understood). My initial thought was: Does it mean that the annotation itself is the new asset? If so I think it could be stated more clearly, for instance: "A new asset is created (which is the annotation)".
> 
> c) Distribute, Semantics: Now reads: "The act of distributing, display publicly, and publicly perform the asset"
> 
> i) The verb forms are not the same, which causes difficulties in understanding the sentence. I believe it would read better as: "The act of distributing, display[ing] publicly, and publicly perform[ing] the asset."
> 
> ii) Perhaps the 'and' in that sentence means 'or' ? In other words, I'm unclear about whether the Permission to Distribute allows all three of these together and individually? It appears so. If so, wouldn't the correct word for just 'displaying publicly' be 'or', rather than 'and'? (So the best to cover all cases would be 'and/or')?
> 
> d) Give - Comment - 'MUST' : Capitalization means...? See my comment on general problems at start.
> 
> 2.2.2 Duties
> 
> a) reviewTerms - Comment: Now reads: "[Maybe] used when human intervention is required to review the rights expression" "Maybe" is not correct here, I believe; I believe the Comment would read better and consistent with other usage in the document as: "[This action can be] used when human intervention is required to review the rights expression."
> 
> 2.3 Constraints
> 
> a) The first sentence is not comprehensible to me. I believe there has been at least one major punctuation error (comma that should be a period), one minor punctuation error (semi-colon that should be a colon), and one typo error changing a word ('as' that should be 'has').
> 
> I think in fact that it should be two sentences; which would read as follows (changes in square brackets):
> 
> "The Constraint entity [h]as three attributes[:] name, operator and rightOperand[.] For example, to express that…" etc.
> 
> b) Sentence directly above the Table, and Table itself: See my comments about use of periods at sentence endings, for section 2.1. I believe all sentences should end with a period.
> 
> c) Format - Comment: Now reads: "…For example, JPEG image can only be distributed."
> 
> The 'only' incorrectly modifies 'distributed', when what is meant is for it to modify 'JPEG'. A better wording would be: "…For example, only JPEG image can be distributed."
> 
> 2.4 Object
> 
> Sentence directly above the Table, and Table itself: See my comments about use of periods at sentence endings, for section 2.1.
> 
> 2.6 Asset, and 3 Profiles:
> 
> Inconsistent use of periods at sentence endings.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Steven Rowat
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Odrl-version2 mailing list
> Odrl-version2 at odrl.net
> http://odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2_odrl.net

Cheers

Renato Iannella
ODRL Initiative
http://odrl.net