- From: Frederick Hirsch via cvs-syncmail <cvsmail@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:31:12 +0000
- To: public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org
Update of /sources/public/2006/ws/policy
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv10438
Modified Files:
ws-policy-guidelines.html ws-policy-guidelines.xml
Log Message:
Implemented the resolution for issue 4859. Editors' action 335.
Index: ws-policy-guidelines.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.html,v
retrieving revision 1.91
retrieving revision 1.92
diff -u -d -r1.91 -r1.92
--- ws-policy-guidelines.html 18 Jul 2007 23:24:14 -0000 1.91
+++ ws-policy-guidelines.html 19 Jul 2007 08:31:09 -0000 1.92
@@ -208,7 +208,8 @@
attribute</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-not-necessary-to-understand-a-message"><b>12. Not Necessary to Understand a Message</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-assertion-duplication"><b>13. Avoid Duplication of Assertions</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-assertion-parameters"><b>14. Use Parameters for Useful
Information</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-dependent-behaviors"><b>15. Use Nested Assertions for Dependent Behaviors</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-declare-nested-assertions"><b>16. Enumerate Nested Assertions</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-discourage-domain-specific-intersection"><b>17. Discourage Domain Specific Intersection</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-limit-optional-assertions"><b>18. Limit use of Optional Assertions</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-entire-mep-for-optional"><b>19. Consider entire message exchange pattern when specifying Assertions that may be optional</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-indicate-optional-assertion-use"><b>20. Indicate use of an Optional Assertion</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-leverage-defined-attachment-mechanisms"><b>21. Assertion
Authors Should Leverage Defined Attachment Mechanisms</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-use-defined-policy-subjects"><b>22. Assertion
- Authors Should Use Defined Policy Subjects</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-identify-policy-subjects"><b>23. Assertion Authors should Identify Policy Subjects</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-policy-subject"><b>24. Specify Policy Subject(s)</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-policy-subject-Granularity"><b>25. Choose the Most Granular Policy Subject</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-multiple-policy-subjects"><b>26. Define Semantics of Attachment to Multiple Policy Subjects</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-preferred-attachment-point"><b>27. Specify Preferred Attachment Point for an Assertion</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-policy-multiple-instance-semantics"><b>28. Describe Semantics of Multiple Assertions of Same Type</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-specify-composition"><b>29. Specify Composition with Related Assertions</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-independent-assertions"><b>30. Use Independent Assertions for Different Versions of a Behavior</b></a><p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-policy-subject-change"><b>31. Change of the Policy Subject Over Time</b></a></p></li></ul></div><div class="div1">
+ Authors Should Use Defined Policy Subjects</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-identify-policy-subjects"><b>23. Assertion Authors should Identify Policy Subjects</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-policy-subject"><b>24. Specify Policy Subject(s)</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-policy-subject-Granularity"><b>25. Choose the Most Granular Policy Subject</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-multiple-policy-subjects"><b>26. Define Rules for Attachment of an Assertion
+ type to Multiple Policy Subjects</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-preferred-attachment-point"><b>27. Specify Preferred Attachment Point for an Assertion</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-WSDL-policy-multiple-instance-semantics"><b>28. Describe Semantics of Multiple Assertions of Same Type</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-specify-composition"><b>29. Specify Composition with Related Assertions</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-independent-assertions"><b>30. Use Independent Assertions for Different Versions of a Behavior</b></a></p></li><li><p><a href="#bp-policy-subject-change"><b>31. Change of the Policy Subject Over Time</b></a></p></li></ul></div><div class="div1">
<h2><a name="Assertions" id="Assertions"></a>3. What is an Assertion? </h2><p>An assertion is a piece of metadata that describes a
capability related to a specific WS-Policy domain. Sets of domain-specific assertions
are typically defined in a dedicated specification that describes
@@ -1047,17 +1048,24 @@
to which the behavior represented by a policy assertion applies.
</p></div><p>
For authoring convenience, Assertion Authors may allow the
- association of an assertion to multiple policy subjects. If an
- assertion is allowed to be associated with multiple policy
- subjects as is possible with WSDL, then the Assertion Authors have
- the burden to describe the semantics of multiple instances of the
- same assertion attached to different policy subjects at the same
- time in order to avoid conflicting behavior.
- </p><div class="boxedtext"><p><a name="bp-WSDL-multiple-policy-subjects" id="bp-WSDL-multiple-policy-subjects"></a><span class="practicelab">Best
-Practice 26: Define Semantics of Attachment to Multiple Policy Subjects</span></p><p class="practice">If an assertion is allowed to be associated with multiple policy subjects,
- the assertion author should describe the semantics of multiple instances of
- the same assertion attached to multiple policy subjects at the same time.
- </p></div><p>If the capability is not really suitable and may imply
+ association of an assertion to multiple policy subjects within the same context of
+ use (e.g in the same WSDL description). If an assertion is allowed to be
+ associated with multiple policy subjects as is possible with WSDL, then
+ the Assertion Authors have the burden to describe the rules
+ when multiple instances of the same assertion are attached to different
+ policy subjects in order to avoid non-interoperable behavior.
+ </p><div class="boxedtext"><p><a name="bp-WSDL-multiple-policy-subjects" id="bp-WSDL-multiple-policy-subjects"></a><span class="practicelab">Best
+Practice 26: Define Rules for Attachment of an Assertion
+ type to Multiple Policy Subjects</span></p><p class="practice">If an assertion is allowed to be associated with multiple policy subjects,
+ the assertion author should describe the rules for multiple
+ instances of the same assertion attached to multiple policy subjects in
+ the same context.
+ </p></div><p>
+ To give one example, section 2.3 of the
+ Web Services Reliable Messaging Policy Assertion specification
+ [<cite><a href="#WS-RM-Policy">Web Services Reliable Messaging Policy Assertion</a></cite>] gives rules on which Policy Subjects may be associated with the RM
+ Policy assertion, and which WSDL 1.1 elements may have RM Policy assertions attached.
+ </p><p>If the capability may imply
different semantics with respect to attachment points, the
Assertion Authors should consider the following:</p><ul><li><p> Decompose the semantics with several assertions.</p></li><li><p> Rewrite a single assertion targeting a specific subject. </p></li></ul><p>Since many attachment points are available in WSDL, it would be
necessary for Assertion Authors to recommend a preferred attachment
@@ -1629,4 +1637,8 @@
</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">20070718</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">FJH</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Updated Web Services Reliable Messaging Policy reference [<cite><a href="#WS-RM-Policy">Web Services Reliable Messaging Policy Assertion</a></cite>] and WS-Addressing Metadata reference
[<cite><a href="#WS-AddressingMetadata">WS-Addressing Metadata</a></cite>].
Editors' action <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/331">331</a>.
- </td></tr></tbody></table><br></div></div></body></html>
\ No newline at end of file
+ </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">20070719</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">FJH</td><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Implemented the resolution for issue
+ <a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4859">4859</a>.
+ Editors' action:
+ <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/335">335</a>.
+ </td></tr></tbody></table><br></div></div></body></html>
\ No newline at end of file
Index: ws-policy-guidelines.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.106
retrieving revision 1.107
diff -u -d -r1.106 -r1.107
--- ws-policy-guidelines.xml 18 Jul 2007 23:24:14 -0000 1.106
+++ ws-policy-guidelines.xml 19 Jul 2007 08:31:09 -0000 1.107
@@ -1363,26 +1363,33 @@
to which the behavior represented by a policy assertion applies.
</quote>
</p>
-
<p>
For authoring convenience, Assertion Authors may allow the
- association of an assertion to multiple policy subjects. If an
- assertion is allowed to be associated with multiple policy
- subjects as is possible with WSDL, then the Assertion Authors have
- the burden to describe the semantics of multiple instances of the
- same assertion attached to different policy subjects at the same
- time in order to avoid conflicting behavior.
- </p>
-
- <p role="practice" id="bp-WSDL-multiple-policy-subjects">
- <quote>Define Semantics of Attachment to Multiple Policy Subjects</quote>
- <quote>If an assertion is allowed to be associated with multiple policy subjects,
- the assertion author should describe the semantics of multiple instances of
- the same assertion attached to multiple policy subjects at the same time.
- </quote>
- </p>
+ association of an assertion to multiple policy subjects within the same context of
+ use (e.g in the same WSDL description). If an assertion is allowed to be
+ associated with multiple policy subjects as is possible with WSDL, then
+ the Assertion Authors have the burden to describe the rules
+ when multiple instances of the same assertion are attached to different
+ policy subjects in order to avoid non-interoperable behavior.
+ </p>
+ <p role="practice" id="bp-WSDL-multiple-policy-subjects">
+ <quote> Define Rules for Attachment of an Assertion
+ type to Multiple Policy Subjects</quote>
+ <quote>If an assertion is allowed to be associated with multiple policy subjects,
+ the assertion author should describe the rules for multiple
+ instances of the same assertion attached to multiple policy subjects in
+ the same context.
+ </quote>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To give one example, section 2.3 of the
+ Web Services Reliable Messaging Policy Assertion specification
+ [<bibref ref="WS-RM-Policy "/>] gives rules on which Policy Subjects may be associated with the RM
+ Policy assertion, and which WSDL 1.1 elements may have RM Policy assertions attached.
+ </p>
+
- <p>If the capability is not really suitable and may imply
+ <p>If the capability may imply
different semantics with respect to attachment points, the
Assertion Authors should consider the following:</p>
<ulist>
@@ -2629,7 +2636,15 @@
Editors' action <loc href="http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/331">331</loc>.
</td>
</tr>
-
+ <tr>
+ <td>20070719</td>
+ <td>FJH</td>
+ <td>Implemented the resolution for issue
+ <loc href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4859">4859</loc>.
+ Editors' action:
+ <loc href="http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicyeds/actions/335">335</loc>.
+ </td>
+ </tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</inform-div1>
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2007 08:31:18 UTC