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

Re: Action Item http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01

From: Maryann Hondo <mhondo@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 08:10:28 -0400
To: Anthony Nadalin <drsecure@us.ibm.com>
Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org, public-ws-policy-request@w3.org, "Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
Message-ID: <OF501DA41A.E95B924B-ON872571BE.0041DD80-852571BE.0042DFBA@us.ibm.com>
Tony,
Yes there are (at least) two audiences for the primer.

There will be those that want to define a new set of policy assertions ( 
policy authors),
and hopefully this would overlap with the people who will actually 
implement a service that offers this defined set of 
capabilities/constraints ( policy providers).  In the guidelines, there 
may be some considerations  that are specific to "deployment" but in 
general, the definition of new policy
assertions needs to consider the requirements of the 
deployers/implementors or else the assertions will not be useful. 

Then there are those who will use policy assertions to enable 
interoperability ( policy consumers). 

Does that make sense? I suppose we could consider breaking it up into 
"authors" and then "consumers & providers". It is a  bit of a dance.
Is there a specific concern you don't think we have addressed in the 
outline?

Maryann



Anthony Nadalin/Austin/IBM@IBMUS 
Sent by: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
08/01/2006 11:12 PM

To
"Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
cc
public-ws-policy@w3.org, public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
Subject
Re: Action Item 
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01






Seems that this is a mix between folks that will have to write a 
implementation of a domain provider and folks that want to write domain 
specific assertions (which seems to be the title). So I'm still not clear 
on what audience you are targeting 

Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
"Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>


"Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org 
08/01/2006 07:45 PM



To

<public-ws-policy@w3.org>

cc


Subject

Action Item http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01





Folks, 
Per our action item on [1], here is our outline for the Guidelines for 
WS-Policy Assertion Authors document. 
We realize that there is some overlap with the submitted Understanding WS 
Policy document [2] content. Our intention is however to focus on 
guidelines for policy authors rather than detailed descriptions of the 
policy framework itself. We feel that the content should be tailored to 
guiding authors in making the best choices. You will find the outline 
illustrates this intent. 
We will prepare a detailed proposal as to which sections of the UWSP 
document may also be used within the context of our guideline as the next 
step. 
Cheers, 
--umit & maryann 
[1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01 
[2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Jul/att-0001/understanding-ws-policy-07-06-2006.pdf 

2.0 Roles and Responsibilities in Utilizing Policy Assertions 
2.0.1Domain owners 
2.0.2 Consumers 
2.1 General Guidelines for Representation of Policy Expressions and Their 
Target Use 
2.1.1 Compact vs Normal Policy Expressions 
3. Guidelines for Modeling Assertions for Single Domains 
3.1 Identifying a new Policy Domain 
3.2 Framework considerations for Decomposing a new Policy Domain 
3.2.1 Nested domains 
3.2.2 Assertions with Parameters 
3.2.3 Comparison 
3.2.4 Self-Describing Messages 
3.3. Considering Intersection and Merging 
3.4.. Typing Assertions 
3.4.1 Representing Capability vs. Constraints 
3.4.2 Specifying and Naming Assertions 
3.5. Subject Scoping Considerations [related to section 5] 
3.5.1 Levels of Abstraction (i.e. portType vs endpoint) 
3.6.1 Enabling Reuse using policy references 
3.7. Lifecycle of Assertions 
3.7.1 Factors in Extending Assertions 
3.8 Evolution of Assertions (Versioning and Compatibility) 
4. Inter-domain Policy and Composition Issues 
5. Understanding Policy Attachment Mechanisms /Best Practices 
5.1. Appropriate Attachment: Preserving Context-Free Policies 
5.2. Appropriate Attachment: Identifying Assertion Subjects 
5.2.1 Interaction between Subjects 
5.3. Appropriate Attachment: Identifying Assertion Sources 
5.4. Typing Attachment Mechanisms 
6. Scenario and a worked example 
---------------------- 
Dr. Umit Yalcinalp 
Architect 
NetWeaver Industry Standards 
SAP Labs, LLC 
Email: umit.yalcinalp@sap.com Tel: (650) 320-3095 
SDN: https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/weblogs?blog=/pub/u/36238 


picture
(image/gif attachment: 01-part)

picture
(image/gif attachment: 02-part)

picture
(image/gif attachment: 03-part)

picture
(image/gif attachment: 04-part)

picture
(image/gif attachment: 05-part)

picture
(image/gif attachment: 06-part)

picture
(image/gif attachment: 07-part)

picture
(image/gif attachment: 08-part)

picture
(image/gif attachment: 09-part)

picture
(image/gif attachment: 10-part)

Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2006 12:10:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:40 GMT