- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:02:25 -0700
- To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>, public-ws-policy-eds <public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org>
Looks good! I suggest one minor change to make it super clear on who should do what: s/Use independent assertions for modeling multiple equivalent behaviors./An assertion author should use independent assertions for modeling multiple versions of a behavior./ >4. I couldn't think of an example where we could >point to a spec that changed it's policy subjects >over time. I am not aware of any. Regards, Asir S Vedamuthu Microsoft Corporation -----Original Message----- From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Orchard Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 12:31 PM To: public-ws-policy-eds Subject: My Ais for Sec 6.2/6.3 for 3989 I've checked in my proposals for 3989. Let me know what y'all think of it. Some things of note: 1. There didn't seem to be too much work to do this. Hence, I can take on another AI if somebody would like. 2. There was an extra Best Practice about identify policy subjects that seemed to be a dup of the very first bp. So I deleted it. 3. One of the cool results of our movement to identified BP is that I rewrote the sentence that just refered to section #2 and said policy subjects should be identified to actually point to the Best Practice. 4. I couldn't think of an example where we could point to a spec that changed it's policy subjects over time. Can anybody help? Cheers, Dave
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2007 22:02:36 UTC