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

Re: Ordering between assertions

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 20:41:58 -0400
To: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com
Cc: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>, public-ws-policy@w3.org, public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF3E9FB2B9.0563CEAF-ON85257338.00022F33-85257338.0003A7E5@us.ibm.com>

Are you opening a new issue? or simply making an observation?

If the former, please create a bugzilla issue for this so that we can 
track it.


Christopher Ferris
STSM, Software Group Standards Strategy
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/chrisferris
phone: +1 508 234 2986

public-ws-policy-request@w3.org wrote on 08/13/2007 06:39:12 PM:

> Consider a policy that includes Reliable Messaging, Header Encryption 
> and Signing.
> It seems clear that the Reliable Messaging headers should be added 
> first, the headers encrypted next that finally the signature created and 

> affixed.  At the receiving end, the signature should be checked first, 
> the headers decrypted next and finally the Reliable Messaging headers 
> processed.  This implies that the Policy assertions be processed in a 
> definite sequence.
> The framework document says:
> "Assertions within an alternative are not ordered, and thus aspects such 

> as the order in which behaviors (indicated by assertions) are applied to 

> a subject 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/PR-ws-policy-20070706/#policy_subject> are 
> beyond the scope of this specification. However, authors can write 
> assertions that control the order in which behaviors are applied."
> It seems to me that this is a fairly common scenario and it may be good 
> to show an example, in the Guidelines document,.of how such an ordering 
> assertion may be authored.
> -- 
> All the best, Ashok
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2007 00:42:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:38:35 UTC