You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
ISSUE-11: Does every permission/prohibition need to have both an assignee & assigner?
parties of perm/proh
Does every permission/prohibition need to have both an assignee & assigner?
State:
RAISED
Product:
POE - Information Model
Raised by:
Simon Steyskal
Opened on:
2016-11-08
Description:
The current spec states (comments inline; similar for prohibition):
3.4 Permission
The Permission entity indicates the Actions that the assignee is permitted to perform on the associated Asset.
It is not required for perm/proh to have any party assigned.
In other words, what the assigner (supplier) has granted to the assignee (consumer).
I would argue that not every assigner/assignee has the role of a supplier/consumer.
[...]
Party: the Permission MUST refer to one or more Party entities linked via the Role entity (see Section 2.3.1) (OPTIONAL)
Is it possible to combine MUST and OPTIONAL?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
From my discussion with the lawyer partnership reviewing the ODRL 2.1 Action vocabulary: a policy reflects in fact an agreement/contract between two parties and these two parties must be defined.
An Assigner must be clearly defined as this entity claims to have the right to establish a contract regarding a specific asset. The Assignees could be also well defined - even should if the policy permits any action by the assignee providing access to the asset by third parties - or could be defined as e.g. a category of persons, the open issue is only: how to check if a person interested in exercising a permitted action is a member of this category.
In short: both a strictly defined Assigner and a possibly more open defined Assignee are required.
ISSUE-11: Does every permission/prohibition need to have both an assignee & assigner?
parties of perm/proh
Does every permission/prohibition need to have both an assignee & assigner?
State:
RAISED
Product:
POE - Information Model
Raised by:
Simon Steyskal
Opened on:
2016-11-08
Description:
The current spec states (comments inline; similar for prohibition):
It is not required for perm/proh to have any party assigned.
I would argue that not every assigner/assignee has the role of a supplier/consumer.
Is it possible to combine MUST and OPTIONAL?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: