- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 19:42:58 +0000
- To: public-ws-policy-qa@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3619 ------- Comment #3 from ritzmann@sun.com 2006-09-14 19:42 ------- Copying http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Sep/0072.html: Asir Vedamuthu wrote: >> A policy externally attached to it takes precedence >> over policies which can be directly or indirectly >> attached inside an EPR itself. > > Yes. My read is - policies contained within a policy subject (say an EPR > or another policy subject) aren't in-scope with respect to an external > policy attachment. I'm struggling with the wording in WS-PolAt section 3.4. Can you point me to where exactly it says that? >> If it takes precedence over Endpoint Policy >> Subject's policies then does it take precedence >> over policies which can be associated with it >> through wsdl:portType and wsdl:binding as well ? > > The WSDL port, binding and portType elements are attachment points and > collectively represent the ---endpoint policy subject---. Does that make sense? Why not merge the EPR policy with the policies in the endpoint scope of the WSDL? > It is important to note that the example in Section 3.4 > (WS-PolicyAttachment) is fictitious and illustrative. We just need to make sure the external attachment semantics are clearly defined.
Received on Thursday, 14 September 2006 19:43:08 UTC