W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org > November 2006

Re: Action-90 Review

From: Maryann Hondo <mhondo@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 08:31:31 -0500
To: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Cc: "ext Asir Vedamuthu" <asirveda@microsoft.com>, Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org, public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFA7B34F18.E0F0BD2C-ON87257236.00485BBF-85257236.004A2E57@us.ibm.com>
Frederick,

In general the edits look good.
I have some questions about  the following section[4.4.3 Considerations 
for choosing parameters vs nesting]:

Are these assertions designed for the same policy subject? 
Do these assertions represent dependent behaviors?
If the answers are yes to both of these questions then leveraging nested 
policy expressions is something to consider. Keep in mind that a nested 
policy expression participates in the policy intersection algorithm. If a 
requester uses policy intersection to select a compatible policy 
alternative then the assertions in a nested policy expression play a first 
class role in the outcome. There is one caveat to watch out for: policy 
assertions with deeply nested policy can greatly increase the complexity 
of a policy and should be avoided when they are not needed.

with regard to the first question, I don't think this is explained at all 
in the following paragraph, so i'm not sure what the value of the question 
is, and if it is going to be there, I think we need to explain what the 
alternatives are if both answers are NOT yes.

Maryann



Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org
11/29/2006 11:06 PM

To
"ext Asir Vedamuthu" <asirveda@microsoft.com>
cc
Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, 
<public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org>
Subject
Re: Action-90 Review







Thanks for noting these editorial issues.

I have corrected all of these as part of this editorial pass, with 
the following exceptions:

> 4.5.2 Optional behavior at runtime
>
> s/Leaving the semantics undescribed/Leaving the semantics not or under
> specified/

changed to "Leaving the semantics not specified or incompletely 
specified"

> s/See also 4.3.3 Self Describing Messages . /See also 4.3.3 Self
> Describing Messages./

Issue here seems to be in the specref target, so I didn't touch this 
since it could break elsewhere.
  "See also <specref ref="self-describing"/>."

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia


On Nov 29, 2006, at 9:10 PM, ext Asir Vedamuthu wrote:

> ACTION-90 [1] - Review Action 77 snapshot (document is at
> http://tinyurl.com/yjpbyf
>
> Please find below suggestions to fix typos, grammar and spaces. I
> request other editors to review Action 77 snapshot at
> http://tinyurl.com/yjpbyf
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/90
>
> Regards,
>
> Asir S Vedamuthu
> Microsoft Corporation
>
>
> ----- Notation Used -----
>
> s/Mary/Marie/ Change most recent occurrence of "Mary" to "Marie". The
> old string is currently treated as a literal string -- not a regex.
>
> s/Mary/Marie/G Change all previous and future occurrences of "Mary" to
> "Marie" (within this document).
>
>
> ----- Typos, Grammar and Spaces for Action 77 -----
>
> Table of Contents:
>
> s/parameters vs nesting/parameters vs. nesting/
>
>
> 1. Introduction
>
> s/consistent compinations/consistent combinations/
> s/metadata exxpression/metadata expression/
> s/Web Services Policy 1.5 - Guidelines for Policy Assertion Authors 
> is a
> resource primarily for assertion authors that provides guidelines 
> on the
> use of Web/Web Services Policy 1.5 - Guidelines for Policy Assertion
> Authors is a resource primarily for assertion authors and provides
> guidelines on the use of Web/
>
>
> 3.1.1 WS-Policy Authors
>
> s/WS-SecurityPolicy pecification/WS-SecurityPolicy specification/
>
>
> 3.1.3 Providers
>
> s/policies it is uesful/policies it is useful/
>
>
> 4. General Guidelines for WS-Policy Assertion Authors
>
> s/validation in their desgin/validation in their design/
> s/relies on the Qname/relies on the QName/
> s/provides somes/provides some/
>
>
> 4.1 Assertions and Their Target Use
>
> s/Once the range of policy subjects are/Once the range of policy
> subjects is/
> s/A eferencing mechanism/A referencing mechanism/
>
>
> 4.2 Authoring Styles
>
> s/the @optional attribute/the wsp:optional attribute/
>
>
> 4.3.1 Minimal Approach
>
> s/a way that eflects/a way that effects/
>
>
> 4.3.3 Self Describing Messages
>
> s/when messages can not/when messages cannot/
> s/Best practice:Policy/Best practice: Policy/
>
>
> 4.3.4 Single Domains
>
> s/some might say its/some might say it is/
>
>
> 4.4.2 Nested Assertions
>
> s/Thesp:AlgorithmSuite assertion/The sp:AlgorithmSuite assertion/
> s/Setting aside the details of using transport-level security,,/ 
> Setting
> aside the details of using transport-level security,/
>
>
> 4.4.3 Considerations for choosing parameters vs. nesting
>
> s/for selecting parameters or nesting of assertions,/for selecting
> parameters or nesting of assertions/
>
>
> 4.5.1 Optional behavior in Compact authoring
>
> s/using wsp:optional attribute/using wsp:Optional attribute/
>
>
> 4.5.2 Optional behavior at runtime
>
> s/Note that in order for an optional behaviors to be engaged/Note that
> in order for an optional behavior to be engaged/
> s/[4.3.3 Self Describing Messages ]/[4.3.3 Self Describing Messages]/
> s/specific endpoint when optional behavior is engaged ./specific
> endpoint when optional behavior is engaged./
> s/Leaving the semantics undescribed/Leaving the semantics not or under
> specified/
> s/policy assertion authors should consider to describe/policy 
> assertion
> authors should consider describing/
> s/See also 4.3.3 Self Describing Messages . /See also 4.3.3 Self
> Describing Messages./
>
>
> 4.6 Typing Assertions
>
> s/(endpoints) or artifacts ( messages)/(endpoints) or artifacts
> (messages)/
> s/indicates which Qnames/indicates which QNames/
>
>
> 4.7 Levels of Abstraction in WSDL
>
> s/This resulted in the finer granularity of the assertion to apply at
> the message policy subject, but the assertion semantics also indicates
> that the if the senders choose to engage RM semantics (although not
> specified via attachment in WSDL at incoming messages), the providers
> will honor the engagement of RM./This resulted in the finer 
> granularity
> of the assertion to apply at the message policy subject, but the
> assertion semantics also indicates that if a sender chose to engage RM
> semantics (although not specified via attachment in WSDL at incoming
> messages), the providers will honor the engagement of RM./
>
>
> 6. Inter-domain Policy and Composition Issues
>
> s/, utilization of WS-Security Policy with other protocols affect/,
> utilization of WS-Security Policy with other protocols affects/
>
>
> 7.3 Appropriate Attachment: Identifying Assertion Sources
>
> s/( in WSDL, the source/(in WSDL, the source/
> s/( using WS-Trust)/(using WS-Trust)/
>
>
> 8. Scenario and a worked example
>
> s/CompanyA/Company A/G
> s/( Policy, All and ExactlyOne)/(Policy, All and ExactlyOne)/
> s/ProfileA/Profile A/G
> s/( not expanded)/(not expanded)/
> s/Since CompanyA has decided to use well known policy expressions that
> are themselves part of a specification/Since CompanyA has decided 
> to use
> well known policy expressions that are part of a specification/
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2006 13:30:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:59 GMT