[Odrl-version2] Party constraints

[Francis Cave]

This is a useful clarification, thank you.

 

I'm intrigued by the concept of multiple Policies associated with an Asset.
Would it be the norm for an ODRL expression to be in a single Policy, or in
multiple Policies, do you think? 

 

Francis

 

 

 

From: odrl-version2-bounces at odrl.net [mailto:odrl-version2-bounces at odrl.net]
On Behalf Of ri at odrl.net
Sent: 18 November 2010 08:40
To: ODRL-Version2
Subject: Re: [Odrl-version2] Party constraints

 

 

On 18 Nov 2010, at 09:25, Francis Cave wrote:





That's fine so long as one is able to include conflict="prohibit" at the
Policy level. But what happens if, for other reasons, one needs
conflict="permit" at the Policy level?

 

If you have the exact same Action in both Permission and Prohibition, then
the Perm will win out.

But in your case, the Action in the Prohibition is further constrained
(hence, not the same) so there is actually no conflict to trigger.

 

 This leads to a more general question. Suppose that a Policy contains some
permissions and prohibitions where the intended resolution of conflicts is
to prohibit, whereas there are other permissions and prohibitions where the
intended resolution of conflicts is to permit. Would such cases be
inexpressible in ODRL? Or would one simply attach multiple Policies to the
asset in question?

 

I think multiple Policies is the safest way...

 

R

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://odrl.net/pipermail/odrl-version2_odrl.net/attachments/20101118/5238dbe3/attachment-0001.html>