W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > August 2006

RE: NEW ISSUE: Misc. (editorial) corrections throughout

From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 17:02:45 -0700
Message-ID: <4DF3D07B9910264B9470DA1F811D1A950B005AE7@RED-MSG-43.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Prasad Yendluri" <prasad.yendluri@webmethods.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
These are good editorial changes. Thank you for carefully reviewing the
drafts.

 

I request the WG to assign these changes to the editors.

 

PS: I'll update your entry in Bugzilla.

 

Regards,

 

Asir S Vedamuthu

Microsoft Corporation

 

________________________________

From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Prasad Yendluri
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 4:00 PM
To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: NEW ISSUE: Misc. (editorial) corrections throughout

 

Title: Misc. (editorial) corrections throughout

 

Description: I would like to suggest a few mostly editorial corrections:

 

1.      section 2.3 terminology

Change From:  "[Definition: A policy vocabulary of a policy is the set
of all policy assertion types
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_assertion_type#polic
y_assertion_type>  used in a policy.]"  

              To:      " [Definition: A policy vocabulary is the set of
all policy assertion types
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_assertion_type#polic
y_assertion_type>  used in a policy.]"

            The removed words are redundant and this now becomes
consistent with the description in section 3.2 (Policy Alternative) that
reads "The vocabulary of a policy
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_vocabulary#policy_vo
cabulary>  is the set of all assertion types used in all the policy
alternatives in the policy."

 

2.      Section 3  starting text says, "This abstract model is
independent of how it is represented as an XML Infoset". However the
description of the Policy Assertion in section 3.1 makes a generous use
of XML Infoset.:

 

a.      The policy assertion type
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_assertion_type#polic
y_assertion_type>  is identified only by the XML Infoset ... (QName)

b.      Policy expression nesting is used by domain authors to further
qualify one or more specific aspects of the original assertion.
(Policy Expression is defined to be XML Infoset representation of a
policy).

c.      The XML Infoset of an assertion MAY contain a non-empty
[attributes] property and/or a non-empty [children] property.

 

Suggest rephrase the main description of section 3 to state that, the
XML Infoset terminology is used for convenience of description but, the
abstract model itself is independent of any Infoset serialization. 

 

3.      Section 3.1 last sentence: 

 

".. domain authors are encouraged to consider when the identity of the
root Element Information Item alone is enough to convey the requirement
(capability)."

 

This seems to imply capability is another name for requirement?  Suggest
take capability out of parenthesis like "requirement or capability

 

4.      Section 4.1 last paragraph below example: 

 

Change "Lines (02-05)" to "(Lines (03-05)"

 

5.      Section 3.4:

 

"Note that a requester may be able to support a policy even if the
requester does not understand the type
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_assertion_type#polic
y_assertion_type>  of each assertion in the vocabulary of the policy
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_vocabulary#policy_vo
cabulary> ; the requester only has to understand the type of each
assertion in the vocabulary of a policy alternative
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_alternative#policy_a
lternative> ."

 

It is not sufficient if the requester understands assertions in a policy
alternative. It also needs to be able to support them.

Rephrase the latter part of the sentence (after ;) as below:

 

";the requester only has to understand the type of each assertion in the
vocabulary of a policy alternative
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.
html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#policy_alternative#policy_a
lternative>  the requester supports."

 

 

Justification: Provided Interspersed in the description part.

 

Target: WS-Policy 1.5 - Framework

 

Proposal - Replacement text proposed with the description.

 

Regards,
Prasad Yendluri

 

 

 
Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2006 00:03:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:33:13 UTC