Re: NEW ISSUE (3638) Need to be able to specify ordering between assertions

On Aug 30, 2006, at 2:36 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote:

> Bijan:
> I don't understand your comment about side-effecting assertions.

Well, part is that I don't think assertions in the normal sense have  
(significant) side-effects.

> Pretty
> much all WS-Policy assertions have side effects as they affect the  
> message content.

Don't you mean that they *constrain* message content? That's a bit  
different than altering them.

Are policies procedural or declarative?

Now, there might be some other bit of the system that does something  
according to a policy.

> Also, re. the example, it is well accepted that WS-Policy will be  
> used to specify
> logging and auditing of messages.

Yes, but it seems leap to then have the *Policy* log and audit the  
message (I don't even know what it means).

Now, perhaps you mean that a policy should be capable of expressing  
fairly fine constraints about logging and auditing. That seems fine,  
of course. But I would think we'd want something a bit more explicit  
and to cleanly distinguish *what* should be logged from *how* it  
should be logged.

Cheers,
Bijan.