Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Does every permission/prohibition need to have both an assignee & assigner? #113

Closed
riannella opened this issue Feb 28, 2017 · 2 comments
Closed
Assignees

Comments

@riannella
Copy link
Contributor

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?

@riannella riannella added this to the Information Model milestone Feb 28, 2017
@nitmws
Copy link
Contributor

nitmws commented Mar 6, 2017

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.

@riannella
Copy link
Contributor Author

The wording in section 3.4 and 3.5 has been updated not to depend on Assignees/Assigners in the definition.

Only certain Policy Types (eg Agreement) require these party roles.

As we only express URIs to identify roles, implementations must then check that is the party exercising the policy.

@riannella riannella self-assigned this Mar 24, 2017
@riannella riannella added this to Last Call in ODRL Deliverables Review Apr 29, 2017
@riannella riannella removed this from Last Call in ODRL Deliverables Review Apr 29, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants