- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:42:48 +0000
- To: public-ws-policy-qa@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4393
Summary: [Primer] Add text to strict and lax policy intersection
discussion describing how a policy consumer can
determine issues due to intersection mode conflicts
Product: WS-Policy
Version: PR
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows XP
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Primer
AssignedTo: fsasaki@w3.org
ReportedBy: cbarreto@adobe.com
QAContact: public-ws-policy-qa@w3.org
Title: Need to provide some text in the Primer to describe how a policy
consumer can determine issues due to intersection mode conflicts as per the
resolution to Issue 4292
(http://www.w3.org/2007/03/14-ws-policy-irc#T17-13-34).
Description: While the Primer covers scenarios on applying intersection modes,
we do not have any content which illustrates how conflicts can be detected.
As such we need to indicate in the Primer how a consumer may address such
conflict detection and reporting.
Justification: As consumers have the option to choose one or more modes for
policy intersection (strict | lax | strict, delegate-to-user | lax,
delegate-to-user | strict, lax, delegate-to-user | ...), conflicts may occur
when providers intend for their policies to be applied only in a lax mode -
this is distinct from treating everything as ignorable. While the end result
may be the same (failure, being that no policy alternatives are available), the
consumer needs to be able to report why this occurs.
Proposal: Add text to the Primer (3.4.1 Strict and Lax Policy Intersection)
that a consumer can compare the intersection results from applying both strict
and lax mode, and analyse what drops out from that application to detect
conflicts and specify their source.
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2007 17:42:53 UTC