W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary?

From: Monica J. Martin <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2007 14:30:23 -0700
To: Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
Cc: "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Message-id: <4612C76F.8040108@sun.com>


hondo: Ashok,
My response is yes.
Maryann

 >>mm1: Ashok, agree with MaryAnn on question one answer - this point 
has been made that the nested assertions are part of the policy 
vocabulary.  Yet, an important point associated with this surrounds 
whether or not the guiding conformance [1] requires support for those 
response types - that provides substance on your second question and its 
disposition.. [2]

We also state in Section 3.2 Framework before the statement you cite:

    An alternative with zero assertions indicates no behaviors. An
    alternative with one or more assertions indicates behaviors implied
    by those, and only those assertions.

Remember: (no position just stating the action-result), we augmented 
this text in http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3602 Issue 3602.

[1] WS-A specification(s) referenced
[2] Related to empty and the base assumptions of WS-Addressing.

>Ashok Malhotra wrote: Section 3.2 of Framework says "When an assertion whose type is part of the policy's vocabulary is not included in a policy alternative, the policy alternative without the assertion type indicates that the assertion will not be applied in the context of the attached policy subject."    Are nested assertions included in the policy's vocabulary?
>
>Consider the following example:
>
>  <wsp:ExactlyOne>
>        <wsp:All>
>            <wsam:Addressing> <-- supports all response types --> Alternative 1
>                <wsp:Policy> 
>                </wsp:Policy>
>            </wsam:Addressing>
>        </wsp:All>
>        <wsp:All>
>            <wsam:Addressing> <-- requires Anonymous responses --> Alternative 2
>                <wsp:Policy>
>                          <AnonymousResponses />
>                </wsp:Policy>
>            </wsam:Addressing>
>        </wsp:All>
>        <wsp:All>
>            <wsam:Addressing> <-  requires nonAnonymous responses --> Alternative 3
>                <wsp:Policy>
>                          <NonAnonymousResponses />
>                </wsp:Policy>
>            </wsam:Addressing>
>        </wsp:All>
>    </wsp:ExactlyOne>
></wsp:Policy>
>
>If Alternative 1 is selected, does this mean that neither Anonymous responses nor NonAnonymous responses are allowed as both are part of the policy vocabulary but not included in the alternative.
>
>All the best, Ashok
>
>  
>
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2007 21:30:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:49 GMT