Renato Iannella

In the Guide, Example 1: - can you use odrl:use instead of dpv-odrl:Use - can you use odrl:purpose instead of dpv-odrl:Purpose In Example 2: - this "odrl:assigner [ a dpv:DataController...

I think you could use the `odrl:isAnyOf` as it is a set operator and means "that a given value is any of the right operand" ``` ex:constraint a odrl:Constraint ;...

The constraint "is any of" does not know about subclass relationships, but an rdf reasoner does. So if the odrl expression include a constraint "is any of" A, and the...

The semantics (subclass) overlaps those of "2.3.3 Subclass of" Hence this one should only be about " equal to an instance " If that is the case, cannot we just...

For 2.3.3 Subclass, does this fit the current definition of "isA": "A set-based operator indicating that a given value is an instance of the right operand of the Constraint." ?

So, the one ODRL property "Semantic equivalence" would cover the semantics of these 5 predicates: rdf:type rdfs:subClassOf skos:broader owl:sameAs skos:exactMatch What about OWL equivalences (for class and properties) and RDFS...

Ok...so (just so I am clear...) we are all happy with: `The policy can have two checks: 1) odrl:eq dpv:Advertising for matching concept IRI is exactly Advertising and 2) odrl:isA...

Would `odrl:isNoneOf` meet this requirement?

Alternatives includes: 1) Create a Prohibition (everything is a 'not') 2) Use SHACL constraint operators: https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#core-components

``` "assignee": { "@type": "PartyCollection", "source": "http://example.com/users", "refinement": [{ "leftOperand": "ex:online-status", "operator": "eq", "rightOperand": { "@value": "true", "@type": "xsd:boolean" } }] }, ```