- From: Monica J. Martin <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 13:01:48 -0700
- To: Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- Cc: "tom@coastin.com" <tom@coastin.com>, Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>, "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>, ws policy <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
>Ashok Malhotra wrote: Tom, you said ... > >>rutt: a missing assertion in a policy means it does not "apply" This does not >>say negation. >> >> >The wording in the spec is the "assertion will not be applied". I take this to mean MUST NOT be applied i.e. negation. > That is part of the point, Ashok, you can take it in many ways and it may be other than what you state in the context of WS-Policy Framework. As indicated previously, a domain could specify that absence is negation as a domain specific constraint. None of my statements infer whether or not these constructs could be valuable or not. It is apparent this discussion should be brokered and resolved in the WS-Policy WG as to stay more confusion in domain groups such as WS-Addressing (we welcome their input too). Thanks.
Received on Monday, 23 April 2007 20:01:23 UTC