Contextual Inputs for ODRL Evaluators

Living Document,

This version:
https://w3id.org/force/sotw
Previous Versions:
Issue Tracking:
GitHub
Editors:
(Ghent University - imec)
(Ghent University - imec)
License:
CC-BY-SA-4.0

Abstract

This document describes a specification and vocabulary with terms to describe evaluation requests and the state of the world, which, in conjunction with policies, are necessary inputs for ODRL evaluators to assess which rules are active and which prohibitions and obligations have been violated or fulfilled.

1. Introd­uction

The Open Digital Rights Language (ODRL) is a W3C standard for policy expression. It is composed by two Recommendations:

which can be used to represent rules over the usage of digital assets.

The Recommendations only standardised the representation of policies, leaving their enforcement out of scope. As such, a recent effort is being led by the W3C ODRL CG to create an ODRL formal semantics specification [odrl-formal-semantics], with the goal of specifying "the expected behaviour of an ODRL Evaluator, a piece of software that performs computations based on a set of policies, a request and a certain state of the world."

In this context, this specification provides a vocabulary to represent the necessary inputs of an Evaluator, which are not standardised in ODRL, i.e., the State of the World (SotW) and the Evaluation Request.

1.1. Terminology

ODRL Compliance Report
A vocabulary that is used to elaborate the result of an evaluation of an ODRL Policy, (optionally) ODRL Request and the State of the World. It elaborates not only whether a rule from a policy is active, but also why.
ODRL Evaluator
A system that determines whether the Rules of an ODRL Policy expression have meet their intended action performance.
State of the World
Knowledge representing real-world information aiding the evaluation of ODRL Policies.
Evaluation Request
Formal description of a requested action by an assignee on a target asset, which can be enriched with further contextual information.

1.2. Namespaces

Commonly used namespace prefixes used in this specification:

@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix ex:      <http://example.org/> .
@prefix odrl:    <http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/> .
@prefix report:  <https://w3id.org/force/compliance-report#> .
@prefix sotw:    <https://w3id.org/force/sotw#> .
@prefix rdf:     <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix xsd:     <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .

2. State of the World

The ODRL Evaluator requires a formal representation of the state of the world. The state of the world specifies knowledge representing real-world information that aids the evaluation of ODRL Policies. For example, a certain state of the world may include the current date and time, the location of agents, or the history of performed actions.

This document aims to provide a formal representation for the state of the world concepts that are necessary to evaluate ODRL policies, without forcing the usage of existing vocabularies, e.g., country codes can be modelled using the ISO 3166 and UN M49 standards. RDF triples to represent the state of the world may be generated as observations from the world generated by third parties or by the ODRL Evaluator itself.

As such, in this document, we aim to provide a minimal set of information that needs to be represented in the state of the world and respective definitions, which will be formally represented in an RDF vocabulary:

Proposed terms to represent a State of the World.
ex:sotw a sotw:SotW ;
    sotw:currentTime ex:currentTime ;
    sotw:currentLocation ex:location ;
    sotw:assetCollection ex:asset ;
    sotw:partyCollection ex:party ;
    sotw:existingReport ex:report ;
    sotw:count ex:count ;
    sotw:event ex:event ;
    sotw:accumulatedTime ex:accumulatedTime ;
    sotw:recipient ex:recipient ;
    sotw:paidAmount ex:paidAmount .

3. Evaluation Request

An ODRL Evaluator requires an Evaluation Request as input. An Evaluation Request represents a formal description of a requested action. In cases where a request is not being made, e.g., during a policy monitoring scenario, an empty Evaluation Request should be provided as input to the ODRL Evaluator.

The Evaluation Request MUST contain the following properties:

Additional contextual information can also be included in the Evaluation Request, e.g., a purpose for exercising the requested action. The context property MAY be used to associate an EvaluationRequest with ODRL constraints that include this additional contextual information.

Proposed terms to represent an Evaluation Request.
ex:request a sotw:EvaluationRequest ;
    dcterms:issued "2024-02-12T11:20:10.999Z"^^xsd:dateTime ;
    sotw:requestedAction odrl:translate ;
    sotw:requestingParty ex:alice ;
    sotw:requestedTarget ex:document-1234 ;
    sotw:context [
        a odrl:Constraint ;
        odrl:leftOperand odrl:language ;
        odrl:operator odrl:eq ;
        odrl:rightOperand "fr"
    ] .

4. Supporting Materials

Conformance

Conformance requirements are expressed with a combination of descriptive assertions and RFC 2119 terminology. The key words “MUST”, “MUST NOT”, “REQUIRED”, “SHALL”, “SHALL NOT”, “SHOULD”, “SHOULD NOT”, “RECOMMENDED”, “MAY”, and “OPTIONAL” in the normative parts of this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119. However, for readability, these words do not appear in all uppercase letters in this specification.

All of the text of this specification is normative except sections explicitly marked as non-normative, examples, and notes. [RFC2119]

Examples in this specification are introduced with the words “for example” or are set apart from the normative text with class="example", like this:

This is an example of an informative example.

Informative notes begin with the word “Note” and are set apart from the normative text with class="note", like this:

Note, this is an informative note.

Index

Terms defined by this specification

References

Normative References

[ODRL-FORMAL-SEMANTICS]
Nicoletta Fornara; et al. ODRL Formal Semantics. URL: https://w3c.github.io/odrl/formal-semantics/
[ODRL-model]
Renato Iannella; Serena Villata. ODRL Information Model 2.2. URL: https://w3c.github.io/poe/model/
[ODRL-VOCAB]
Renato Iannella; et al. ODRL Vocabulary & Expression 2.2. URL: https://w3c.github.io/poe/vocab/
[RFC2119]
S. Bradner. Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels. March 1997. Best Current Practice. URL: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2119