4. the cinema example is very good because it illustrates the concepts and their complexity in a deceptively simple, effective way. However, I think there are some corrections/improvements which could be made:
- remove distracting (and even misleading) details: e.g., "bought a ticket for the requested fee" could be replaced by the simpler, more general "hold a ticket". If a more significant detail is explicitly required then "hold a valid ticket" could be used. [Note: Even this simplification can be criticised - if you take me to the cinema then you will both pay for and hold my ticket - but no one requires that an example be free of exceptions. It should be free of excess noise, however.]
- a more serious oversight is that the criterionRequirement "over 18" in the third scenario must be applied to both options, at least in the way it is currently explained. If Press accreditation somehow implies "over 18" then this will come out in the requirementResponses where the same evidence will satisfy two different criteriaRequirements.
Reported by David Mitzman and Loukia Demiri
Fixed the example as per the comment.
Solved in release 0.23