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

RE: NEW ISSUE: "Policy Alternatives" and "Policy" need proper definit ion

From: Daniel Roth <Daniel.Roth@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 16:23:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CACD2E414F77164CA4F324AF9A2094F30210CCBE@RED-MSG-70.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Prasad Yendluri" <prasad.yendluri@webmethods.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
I'm having difficulty understanding this issue.  Some examples that
demonstrate how the current definitions are ambiguous would be helpful.

 

Thanks.

 

Daniel Roth

 

________________________________

From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Prasad Yendluri
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 4:15 PM
To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: NEW ISSUE: "Policy Alternatives" and "Policy" need proper
definit ion

 

Title: "Policy Alternatives" and "Policy" need proper definition

 

Description: Section 2.3 terminology defines a "policy" to be, "a
collection of policy alternatives
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_alternative#policy_a
lternative> "

No further constraints on how these assertions are grouped, i.e. on the
origin of assertions in the collection.

 

Similarly section 3.2 (Policy) defines a "policy" to be: "a policy
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy#policy>  is a
potentially empty collection of policy alternatives
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_alternative#policy_a
lternative> ."

 

This "collection" does not account for level of nesting of a specific
policy alternative. 

 

Section 2.3 terminology defines a "Policy Alternative" to be "a
collection of policy assertions
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_assertion#policy_ass
ertion> " only. 

No further restriction on how these assertions are grouped (or) the
origin of the assertions in the collection.

 

 

Similarly section 3.2 (Policy Alternative) defines a policy alternative
to be: 

"A policy alternative
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_alternative#policy_a
lternative>  is a logical construct which represents a potentially empty
collection of policy assertions
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_assertion#policy_ass
ertion> . An alternative with zero assertions indicates no behaviors."

 

This "collection" again does not account for level of nesting of a
policy assertion included.

 

Justification:

There is scope for interpretation that needs to be eliminated. "policy
assertion" and "policy" definitions need to account for level of nesting
of the collection they define. 

 

Target: WS-Policy 1.5 - Framework

 

Proposal - Tighten up the definitions of "policy" and "policy
assertion". Sorry I have not come up suggestion for a specific
replacement text at this point.

Hope to follow-up later.

 

 

Regards,

Prasad Yendluri

 
Received on Monday, 31 July 2006 23:24:22 GMT

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