See also: IRC log
<renato> Chair: Renato
<scribe> scribenick: Brian_Ulicny
<renato> Approve: https://www.w3.org/2016/09/05-poe-minutes
<renato> UC.05 http://w3c.github.io/poe/ucr/#audienceId
Two use cases we haven't discussed: #5 from UCI. From Mo.
Something about the parties who are the recipients of the content.
"Any thoughts?"
"Will leave for the F2F/TPAC"
"welcome, Sabrina"
"use case #25 is new this week"
<renato> UC.05 https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases#Magazine_Media_Permissions
<renato> UC.25
<renato> UC.05 -> related to parties (group membership etc) - part of previous requirements discussions
ben: "there is hope that there is an ontology out there that defines group membership, not us"
"UC.25 comes from PRISM specification, another standards group"
"related to permissions for magazine media"
"constraints on time, geography, channel, ... photo rights characteristics"
"example given: an odrl-like set of statements"
"embargo dates. expression dates"
"there is a purpose constraint, which is supportable"
"has a policy bundle: duties expressed against all of the permissions in that bundle"
"publishers want to e.g. publish video to their mobile app"
"concept of the use bundle: all the ways you want to use the content could be bundled together"
"could this be handled by the notion of a set?"
renato: "set was designed for this"
sabrina: "my preference would be to have a set of
assets/uses rather than sets of policies"
... "this allows for greater flexibility"
<renato> Support
<renato> ..sets for reuse
stuart: "the PRISM people don't like the XML syntax"
renato: "no one likes xml anymore"
sabrina: "using ODRL to model the new privacy regulation.
This is where we need bundling. Shows where ODRL works well and where it
needs to be changed."
... "should I write it up?"
renato: "never too late. please feel free to add"
stuart: "the bisg book standardization group has been preparing a use case to submit on books and parts of books. In next week or so."
renato: "for UC.25, we seem to be on track to resolve with other requirements"
ben: "this issue of providing purposes is one that comes up repeatedly. Not our business to provide purposes"
"should we?"
renato: "we can think about it"
<renato> https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/wiki/Examples
brian: "why not just accommodate purposes as free text-like comment?"
renato: "we do have purpose constraints"
"not enforceable from a computational point of view"
"purpose of education, e.g."
renato: "let's wait for proposal"
... "any other comments on UC.25?"
brian: "was UC.23 ever discussed"
ben: "yes, discussed last week."
<renato> Wiki requirements: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Requirements
uc.23 = deletions must be propagated
renato: "Long list of wiki requirements. too long to go over now."
r: "part of requirements process"
renato: "if you have comments, add them to the wiki in advance of the f2f"
"especially if you can't make it next week"
<smyles> https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Use_Cases
stuart: "the table of contents of the wiki use cases page needs to be update"
*updated
stuart: "confusing because some of the use cases don't have numbers but they do in the ToC"
renato: "any other qs or comments?"
... "logistics"
... "agenda has been updated for f2f"
"more detail added"
<renato> TPAC Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:TPAC2016
renato: "in afternoon, we will look at some of the other working group items"
"e.g. formal semantics group"
renato: "probably the best thing we'll do in friday will be
to create a lot of github issues that we can track back to requirements"
... "qs about tpac?"
<renato> https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Attending_F2F1
renato: "lot of observers coming as well"
ben: "a privacy person coming. interesting for you, sabrina"
renato: "what about bob bailey, from tr?"
ben: "he's my boss. block chain person coming, too. re: Ethereum smart policies"
renato: "we'll do a summary of the two days at 5ish on
Friday"
... "other business?"
"none. ok, thanks."
"no regular telecoms for a few weeks"
<ivan> trackbot, end telcon