RE: Action Item http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frederick Hirsch [mailto:frederick.hirsch@nokia.com] 
> Sent: Friday, Aug 04, 2006 2:01 PM
> To: Yalcinalp, Umit
> Cc: Frederick Hirsch; public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Action Item 
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01
> 
> Would it be worth having an additional final section on things to  
> avoid, known common mistakes or inefficiencies to be avoided? Is  
> there such a list from experience in interops?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> regards, Frederick

I was hoping that we would cover them in specific sections that are
relevant. Just to give you an example, the issue regarding optionality
has been reported as a result of the interop and it was discussed in
specific venues like WS-RX wrt policy subjects. 

A discussion on this issue alone probably will go to designing
assertions and choosing the appropriate attachments just for that
problem alone.  

If you would like, we could have a summary in the end as well. I am open
to suggestions. 

> 
> Frederick Hirsch
> Nokia
> 
> 
> On Aug 1, 2006, at 8:45 PM, ext Yalcinalp, Umit wrote:
> 
> > Folks,
> >
> > Per our action item on [1], here is our outline for the Guidelines  
> > for WS-Policy Assertion Authors document.
> >
> > We realize that there is some overlap with the submitted  
> > Understanding WS Policy document [2] content. Our intention is  
> > however to focus on guidelines for policy authors rather than  
> > detailed descriptions of the policy framework itself. We feel that  
> > the content should be tailored to guiding authors in making the  
> > best choices. You will find the outline illustrates this intent.
> >
> > We will prepare a detailed proposal as to which sections of the  
> > UWSP document may also be used within the context of our guideline  
> > as the next step.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > --umit & maryann
> >
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/12-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01
> >
> > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Jul/ 
> > att-0001/understanding-ws-policy-07-06-2006.pdf
> >
> > 2.0 Roles and Responsibilities in Utilizing Policy Assertions
> > 2.0.1Domain owners
> > 2.0.2 Consumers
> > 2.1 General Guidelines for Representation of Policy 
> Expressions and  
> > Their Target Use
> > 2.1.1 Compact vs Normal Policy Expressions
> > 3. Guidelines for Modeling Assertions for Single Domains
> > 3.1 Identifying a new Policy Domain
> > 3.2 Framework considerations for Decomposing a new Policy Domain
> > 3.2.1 Nested domains
> > 3.2.2 Assertions with Parameters
> > 3.2.3 Comparison
> > 3.2.4 Self-Describing Messages
> > 3.3. Considering Intersection and Merging
> > 3.4.. Typing Assertions
> > 3.4.1 Representing Capability vs. Constraints
> > 3.4.2 Specifying and Naming Assertions
> > 3.5. Subject Scoping Considerations [related to section 5]
> > 3.5.1 Levels of Abstraction (i.e. portType vs endpoint)
> > 3.6.1 Enabling Reuse using policy references
> > 3.7. Lifecycle of Assertions
> > 3.7.1 Factors in Extending Assertions
> > 3.8 Evolution of Assertions (Versioning and Compatibility)
> > 4. Inter-domain Policy and Composition Issues
> > 5. Understanding Policy Attachment Mechanisms /Best Practices
> > 5.1. Appropriate Attachment: Preserving Context-Free Policies
> > 5.2. Appropriate Attachment: Identifying Assertion Subjects
> > 5.2.1 Interaction between Subjects
> > 5.3. Appropriate Attachment: Identifying Assertion Sources
> > 5.4. Typing Attachment Mechanisms
> > 6. Scenario and a worked example
> >
> > ----------------------
> >
> > Dr. Umit Yalcinalp
> > Architect
> > NetWeaver Industry Standards
> > SAP Labs, LLC
> > Email: umit.yalcinalp@sap.com Tel: (650) 320-3095
> > SDN: https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/weblogs?blog=/pub/u/36238
> >
> 
>

Received on Friday, 4 August 2006 22:07:23 UTC