- From: Maryann Hondo <mhondo@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:47:43 -0600
- To: <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF0138C729.61BA6774-ON872571C6.0052FA66-852571C6.0056AF7C@us.ibm.com>
The action item [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/07/13-ws-policy-minutes.html#action24]) is not clearly specified as to the problem with the text so here's my best attempt at identifying the offending text and providing a clarification. Here is paragraph 3 & 4: It is RECOMMENDED that, where specific policy assertions associated with one policy subject are only compatible with specific policy assertions on another policy subject in the same hierarchical chain, the policies containing these assertions should be attached within a single WSDL binding hierarchy. For any given port, the policy alternatives for each policy subject type SHOULD be compatible with each of the policy alternatives at each of the policy subjects parent and child policy subjects, such that choices between policy alternatives at each level are independent of each other. Here is my proposed additonal text to go before ( or possibly instead of paragraph 3) . It is RECOMMENDED that when policy domain authors define sets of policy assertions that could be applied to various levels of a WSDL hierarchy, they also describe any relationships or restrictions that exist between the policy assertions and the policy subjects in the same hierarchical chain, so that the policy alternatives can be determined appropriately. An example of this can be seen in the WS-SecurityPolicy Appendix A and guidelines for policy domain authors are provided in the Primer.
Received on Thursday, 10 August 2006 15:57:52 UTC