- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:51:39 -0500
- To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
- Cc: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
On Feb 18, 2007, at 12:34 PM, Murray Maloney wrote: > At 04:01 PM 2/17/2007 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote: >> [...] >> Yes, it should have some discretion. I meant for "local policy >> an configuration" to convey that sense of discretion... >> >> "Given a URI I of an information resource IR, and an XPath node N for >> a >> representation of IR, subject to security considerations below and >> local >> policy and configuration, a GRDDL Agent should:" >> >> Is that perhaps clear enough on second look? > > That would be enough for me, because I understand the intent of the > exception, > but I wonder whether other readers would be able to extract the same > meaning. > I think that we need to somehow make it clear that a GRDDL-aware agent > is an > agent which acts on behalf of a client that may exercise some > authority over > the agent and may interdict some of the agent's actions to suit it's > own policies. > While that may seem intuitive to the members of the WG, I doubt that > our intuition > can be gleaned from the spec. I can't think of anything more clear. I think what's there is OK, but I'm open to suggestions. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 19 February 2007 20:51:21 UTC