Not sure we'll work on this at all in tomorrow's call, but I did want to finally clean this up. Please see slides 9-12 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1I12agEsfaJK3LEiJyROrJV3PCEmhlCzCxYS7wSfzDjU/edit?usp=sharing> in particular. (Remember, if you haven't accessed the deck before, I'll need to give you permission.) Basically what I've done is convert from a table/matrix approach to keeping the "spaghetti"/visual approach when delving into the particulars of the legal device-to-technical artifact mappings. A sample is below. Jim has mentioned to me that he has a good candidate use case we could POC, and I hope to see him end of next week to work on this a bit. Building up a realistic set of agreements/licenses/resulting artifacts/flows is key. *Eve Maler*Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl
