Ontologies and reasoning techniques for (legal) intelligent information retrieval systems
Artificial Intelligence and Law
Toward practical authorization-dependent user obligation systems
ASIACCS '10 Proceedings of the 5th ACM Symposium on Information, Computer and Communications Security
Ensuring authorization privileges for cascading user obligations
Proceedings of the 17th ACM symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In two interesting papers ((1983), (1986)) Thorne McCarty has presented a semantics for the central deontic concepts, permission and obligation, based upon a semantics for an action language. The latter, in turn, was constructed along lines deriving from Pratt-Harel dynamic logic.I shall here offer some critical comments on McCarty's analysis of the relationship between obligation and permission, and of his account of so-called “free-choice” permissions; these come in section II, below. In section I an outline sketch is given of the main features of McCarty's semantics with which the criticism will be concerned.