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

RE: Strawman for AI 286, 303, 305, 313

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:32:55 -0700
Message-ID: <BEBB9CBE66B372469E93FFDE3EDC493E291540@repbex01.amer.bea.com>
To: "Maryann Hondo" <mhondo@us.ibm.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
I think I'm ok with most of the changes, but I have a lot of heartburn
over the issue of "XML Outlines" AI 305 and tying WS-Policy to them.  I
think we should say something more generic like a human readable and
machine processable description.  I don't see any customers doing custom
assertions using "XML Outlines", that's only geeks like us in the WS-*
groups.
 
But I think it me to propose something.  I'll bring it up on the policy
wg call somewhere.
 
Cheers,
Dave


________________________________

	From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Maryann Hondo
	Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 3:30 PM
	To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
	Subject: Strawman for AI 286, 303, 305, 313
	
	

	All, 
	
	I've had several AI's for the Guidelines document, and I have
created a strawman for addressing them. 
	I've created a diff doc against the latest version of the
Guidelines document to address the following: 
	
	AI 286 - There has been an ongoing action to deal with the
Guidelines document with regard to things we 
	have learned from the WS-Addressing groups efforts to create new
assertions. 
	                
	        Monica had floated several proposals dealing with
context and vocabulary. 
	        I tried to incorporate this input into the sections
5.4.2 "Nested Assertions" and Section 8 "Designing Assertions". 
	        I may not have captured all the text, but I thought I'd
tee this up for discussion 
	
	AI 303 - propose "bumper sticker text" 
	
	        This one came up at the F2F where we were discussing
changes to BP 7. 
	
	        This may seem like a radical change, but when I looked
at the table of Best Practices, I couldn't really relate 
	        to this list.  It seemed very inconsistent in its
"guidance".  I looked at other BP docs at the W3C and used the 
	        I18N one as an example. 
	
	        I took the model of having each item  be 
	                "Best Practice # - <statement> " 
	        I think its now more of a clear "should" or "action"
statement ( but am always open to friendly amendments) 
	
	AI 305- Generalize Best Practice for XML outline 
	
	        I moved a bunch of things around trying to "group" all
the best practices that deal with the XML outline section 
	        and I included an example from the Reliable exchange
document. 
	
	        In doing this I also restructured the "ignorable" and
"optional" sections to remove the "general guidance" on 
	        defining the attributes ( since this is now in the
"general" section) and tried to add text to make the sections 
	        be more in parallel. 
	
	AI 313 - Bug 3978---- Section 7 
	
	        I still think the Best Practices text in this section
should be included.  But I think it was in the wrong place. 
	        So I propose moving it to Section  5.7 and propose
rewording this to be Best Practices for Policy Attachment. 
	        Then have a "general" section, and then have a section
for "WSDL" specific Best practices. 
	
	
	Maryann 
	        
	        
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 03:33:23 GMT

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