W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org > July 2007

2006/ws/policy ws-policy-guidelines.html,1.79,1.80 ws-policy-guidelines.xml,1.94,1.95

From: Frederick Hirsch via cvs-syncmail <cvsmail@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 20:21:21 +0000
To: public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1I9Rdh-0002rm-9S@lionel-hutz.w3.org>

Update of /sources/public/2006/ws/policy
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv11001

Modified Files:
	ws-policy-guidelines.html ws-policy-guidelines.xml 
Log Message:
add code markup and fix typo related to previous checkin -

(Restructured and updated 5.8 Interrelated domains to use Architecture of WWW format and add example, according to Editors' action 309. Updated the WSDL 20 reference [WSDL 2.0 Core Language] and WS-SecurityPolicy reference [WS-SecurityPolicy] for issue 4831. Editors' action 326

Removed one lone "example" sub-heading , making document consistent.)

Index: ws-policy-guidelines.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.html,v
retrieving revision 1.79
retrieving revision 1.80
diff -u -d -r1.79 -r1.80
--- ws-policy-guidelines.html	13 Jul 2007 20:05:58 -0000	1.79
+++ ws-policy-guidelines.html	13 Jul 2007 20:21:18 -0000	1.80
@@ -1068,8 +1068,8 @@
 			specifies the use of transport security to protect a message sequence, for example.</p><div class="exampleOuter">
 <p style="text-align: left" class="exampleHead"><i><span>Example 5-10. </span>Reliable Message Sequence Security</i></p><div class="exampleInner"><pre>&lt;wsrmp:SequenceTransportSecurity [wsp:Optional="true"]? ... /&gt;</pre></div></div><p>The Reliable Message Policy specification states
 				"This assertion is effectively meaningless unless it occurs in conjunction with the 
-					RMAssertion and a sp:TransportBinding assertion that requires the use of some transport-level
-					security mechanism (e.g. sp:HttpsToken).".
+					<code>RMAssertion</code> and a <code>sp:TransportBinding</code> assertion that requires the use of some transport-level
+					security mechanism (e.g. <code>sp:HttpsToken</code>)".
 				</p></div></div><div class="div1">
 <h2><a name="versioning-policy-assertions" id="versioning-policy-assertions"></a>6. Versioning Policy Assertions</h2><p>Assertion Authors need to consider not just the expression of the current set of requirements but
 		how they anticipate new assertions being added to the set.  There are three aspects to versioning policy assetions:</p><ul><li><p> Assertion Extensibility </p></li><li><p> Policy Language Extensibility </p><p>Over time, the Policy WG or third parties can version or extend the Policy Language with new 

Index: ws-policy-guidelines.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.94
retrieving revision 1.95
diff -u -d -r1.94 -r1.95
--- ws-policy-guidelines.xml	13 Jul 2007 20:05:58 -0000	1.94
+++ ws-policy-guidelines.xml	13 Jul 2007 20:21:18 -0000	1.95
@@ -1409,8 +1409,8 @@
 				</example> 
 			<p>The Reliable Message Policy specification states
 				<quote>This assertion is effectively meaningless unless it occurs in conjunction with the 
-					RMAssertion and a sp:TransportBinding assertion that requires the use of some transport-level
-					security mechanism (e.g. sp:HttpsToken).</quote>.
+					<code>RMAssertion</code> and a <code>sp:TransportBinding</code> assertion that requires the use of some transport-level
+					security mechanism (e.g. <code>sp:HttpsToken</code>)</quote>.
 				</p>
 		</div2>
 	</div1>
Received on Friday, 13 July 2007 20:21:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:03 GMT