RE: looking for clarification on action item 43

Maryann,

 

> Is there a related change needed to the Framework?

 

There was a related separate AI 107
(http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicy/actions/107) and corresponding
editors EAI 29 (http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/29
<http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/29> ), that were
targeted at the framework document.

 

Regards,

Prasad

 

  _____  

From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Maryann Hondo
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 3:07 PM
To: public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org
Subject: looking for clarification on action item 43

 


All, 

I am working on the Editors action,  #43, working group action #108, and I
have a question. 

This is the text in the AI....   

ACTION-108 
Add adopted guidance to Guidelines document for Issue 3577 
2006-09-20: Adopted text for Issue 3577 is: "If you don't recognize a QName,
you cannot guarantee anything about the compatibility of the intersected
alternatives." 

2006-09-21: Corresponding Editors' AI is (43):
<http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/43>
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/43 

in the bug 3577......it says .... to add text to the Framework.... 


Resolved at Sept F2F meeting:
 <http://www.w3.org/2006/09/13-ws-policy-minutes.html>
http://www.w3.org/2006/09/13-ws-policy-minutes.html

Add text like the following to the Framework:

a) If domain-specific intersection alg is required you will know that by
lookig
at the Qname. 

b) If domain-specific intersection alg is required you will know that by
lookig
at the Qname. 


What we currently have in the Guidelines is the following section.... 

 Comparison of Nested and Parametrized Assertions 

       The main consideration for selecting parameters or nesting 
        of assertions, is that the framework intersection 
        algorithm processes nested alternatives, but does not consider 
        parameters in its algorithm. 

       Domain authors should recognize that the framework can 
        yield multiple assertions of the same type. The QName 
        of the assertion is the only vehicle for the framework to 
        match a specific assertion, NOT the contents of the 
        element. If the assertion is a parameterized assertion the 
        authors must understand that this type of assertion will 
        require additional processing by consumers in order to 
        disambiguate the assertions or to understand the semantics of 
        the name value pairs, complex content, attribute values 
        contribution to the processing. Therefore, if the domain 
        authors want to delegate the processing to the framework, 
        utilizing nesting should be considered. Otherwise, domain 
        specific comparison algorithms would need to be devised and be 
        delegated to the specific domain handlers that are not visible 
        to the WS-Policy framework. The tradeoff is the generality 
        vs. the flexibility and complexity of the comparison expected 
        for a domain. 


Is this sufficient? 
Is there a related change needed to the Framework? 

thanks. 
Maryann