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

Re: New Issue: 5189 Guidelines - BP 19 Lacks Motivation

From: Maryann Hondo <mhondo@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:10:26 -0400
To: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
Cc: "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>, public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF6B4998C5.36FC87D8-ON87257375.00626EB2-85257375.0063CB7F@us.ibm.com>
Asir,

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my response. I believe that 19 and 28 
address different concerns.
19 is intended to address the impact of the optional attribute when 
applied to a policy subject scope. I think "endpoint" 
may not be the best term, so I have supplied an alternative wording to 
consider.

28 refer's specifically to WSDL subjects.  If you are implying that 28 has 
broader implications then we may
consider deleting it from 5.7.2 and putting it in 5.7.1.


I suggest this change to the EXISTING BP-- 19.

from:
Assertion Authors should associate optional assertions with the 
appropriate endpoint and use the smallest possible granularity to limit 
the degree to which optionality applies.

to:
Assertion Authors may recommend assertions be annotated with optional 
attributes and associated with the appropriate [policy]subject and may 
recommend the use of the smallest possible granularity to limit the degree 
to which optionality applies.


Maryann




Maryann Hondo/Austin/IBM
10/15/2007 09:39 AM

To
Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
cc
"public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>, 
public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
Subject
Re: New Issue: 5189 Guidelines - BP 19 Lacks Motivation





Asir,
I disagree.

I think the best practice is  necessary.

Perhaps this is a better wording:

Assertion Authors should associate optional assertions with the 
appropriate endpoint subject and use the smallest possible granularity to 
limit the degree to which optionality applies." [1]

Maryann





Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
10/12/2007 10:34 PM

To
"public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
cc

Subject
New Issue: 5189 Guidelines - BP 19 Lacks Motivation







Title: Guidelines - BP 19 Lacks Motivation

Description:

"Best Practice 19: Consider entire message exchange pattern when 
specifying Assertions that may be optional

Assertion Authors should associate optional assertions with the 
appropriate endpoint and use the smallest possible granularity to limit 
the degree to which optionality applies." [1]

The best practice that applies to granularity is covered by best practice 
28 [2]. It is unclear why an assertion author would associate an assertion 
with "the appropriate endpoint". It is also unclear what behavior that the 
best practice is trying to motivate.

Justification: unclear best practice.

Target: Guidelines.

Proposal: This is a two part proposal -

a) Drop best practice 19.
b) s/This is important for an optional assertion where it may not be clear 
whether it is to apply in a message exchange when optionally used in part 
of that exchange (Best Practice: Consider entire message exchange pattern 
when specifying Assertions that may be optional).//

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-ws-policy-guidelines-20070928/#bp-entire-mep-for-optional

[2] 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-ws-policy-guidelines-20070928/#bp-WSDL-policy-subject-Granularity


Regards,

Asir S Vedamuthu
Microsoft Corporation
Received on Monday, 15 October 2007 18:11:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:53 GMT