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

Proposed 4662 changes

From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 05:09:42 -0700
To: "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4D66CCFC0B64BA4BBD79D55F6EBC22574789EBF38A@NA-EXMSG-C103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

The F2F meeting started to deal with the following set of issues today.

>10. Guidelines issues - Part 2 (10:50 am BST)
>
>a) Issue 4661 [Guidelines] Reorganize guidance on XML Info Set represen...
>http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4661
>
>b) Issue 4662 [Guidelines] Proposal for AI 305
>http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4662
>
>ACTION-324 Asir to follow-up on 4662 to relate msft comments
>DONE. See:
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Jun/0078.html
>Moncia's reply:
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Jun/0089.html
>
>Monica's comments:
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Jun/0088.html

The following changes to the Issue 4662 proposal were discussed (not finalized) this morning:

1. Change 4662 proposal:

Change:
At a minimum, assertion authors need to document the semantics of the
assertions [Best Practice 2] and included in that definition should be
some indication about any impact of the assertion behavior at
intersection

to:
At a minimum, assertion authors need to document the semantics of the
assertions [Best Practice 2].

Included in that definition should be any attributes that impact intersection such as wsp:ignorable.

2. Change 4662 proposal

>When policy expression authors include assertions in service policies

Change "service policies" to "policy expressions".

3. Change 4662 proposal

Remove the sentence "Ignorable behaviors indicate behavior at the time of intersection".

4. Change 4662 proposal

Change:
Assertion authors should
indicate the semantic of the runtime behavior in the description of the
assertion that allows the ignorable attribute.

to:
Regardless of whether the assertion allows the ignorable attribute, assertions authors should indicate the semantic of the runtime behaviour in the description of the assertion.

Add the sentence:
An assertion description should include guidance as to the use of (or
constraint against the use of) the wsp:Ignorable attribute to indicate
whether the behavior indicated by the QName may be ignored by policy
intersection.

5. Change 4662 proposal:

Change:
In the case where one party chooses to engage in runtime behavior with another party based on alternatives from a lax mode intersection algorithm,  the runtime behavior is out of scope of the policy framework.

to:
In the case where one party chooses to engage with another party based on policy alternatives resulting from a Framework intersection algorithm, the resulting policy could include a policy assertion marked as Ignorable. Whether or not that assertion is engaged is outside of the scope of the policy framework regardless if wsp:optional was used in the compact form.

6. Change 4662 proposal:

Remove the following:
Policy intersection in strict mode will result in an alternative that consists only of assertions known to both parties.  Hence the runtime behavior is known to both.

Policy intersection in lax mode may result in alternatives with assertions that exist in one parties policy but not the other parties policy.

/paulc

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2007 12:11:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:52 GMT