Subject of the Constraint

[riannella]

Add new property to Constrait model to indicate (the assumed) subject

See: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Requirements#POE.R.DM.02_Define_target_of_a_constraint

[riannella]

As we assumed that Constraints in a Permission only applies to the action, if we have now have Constraints that also apply to the Asset and/or Party, then we now need to associate them more explicitly. That is, if there was two parties, which constraint applies.

[nitmws]

Comment: the discussion of the Constraint conference call on 15 November preferred to express the subject of a contstraint by the natural language definition of the left operand and not to use a property of the class Constraint for that purpose.

[riannella]

Sorry @nitmws I am not sure I understand your comment. Can you give an example of what you mean?

[nitmws]

I copy and paste from my proposed refined left operand definitions, any subject beyond the Action is in bold:

• absoluteTemporalPositionAsset: The absolute temporal positions in a media stream the Asset has to fit in after the Action.
• fileFormatBefore: The file format of the Asset before the Action is exercised.
• version: The range of versions of the Asset which can or cannot be used for exercising the Action.

In fact in these examples only the Asset is the alternative subject - and included into the free-text definition of the constraint.

Regarding a party as subject: I recall discussions where it was said that assignees could be constrained by a definition of this party, e.g. we have in a RightsML example "all customers of the assigner-company XYZ".

A special facet of that are recipients: They are neither Assigner nor Assignee. But for that we have already a constraint: "The party receiving the result of an exercised Action." If one wants to constrain these people to students then the right operand value has to define a corresponding entity.

[riannella]

Ok, got it now ;-) Yes, I think natural language definition is good.

[nitmws]

:-)

[riannella]

5 Dec Teleconference decided to use Scope for Asset/Party.
So this requirement is not longer needed.