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

RE: NEW ISSUE (3639) Which policy alternative was selected?

From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@progress.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 10:36:27 -0400
Message-ID: <80A43FC052CE3949A327527DCD5D6B2701E6C15C@MAIL01.bedford.progress.com>
To: <public-ws-policy@w3.org>

Hi Ashok:

> The situation we are discussing is where both endpoints have policies
> and policy matching is used to determine acceptable alternatives.
> [...] 
> Q2. When a message is received, which alternative from among 
> the acceptable
> alternatives was applied? 
> 
> Here is a proposal for Q2.  
> 
> - A new policy is constructed containing only the selected 
> alternative.
> - The message points to this policy in a standard manner.

I'd wonder if this also dovetails with the "Policy expressions with no
wire manifestation" thread.  If there were a standard way to indicate in
a SOAP header that a particular policy alternative was selected from the
acceptable choices, then policies with "no wire manifestation" would
automatically gain a wire-level indication of their selection.  This
header could for instance be signed for non-repudiation purposes.

It's certainly true that this could be acccomplished on a per-assertion
basis (I introduce a "conformance claim" header which becomes the
individual wire representation of my "Is_ISO9001" policy assertion, for
example) but having one standard place to cover the "contract" could be
extremely convenient, and result in significantly less clutter in the
message.

Personally, I think this is v.Next work if it happens, but it's
interesting to bookmark.

--Glen
Received on Wednesday, 27 September 2006 16:52:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:41 GMT