Re: NEW ISSUE: (3622) Policy assertion equivalence and generality

Hi Bijan,

Are you aware of Anne Anderson's work? She's designed a simple language 
that is compatible with WS-Policy and seems to fit your requirements:

http://research.sun.com/projects/xacml/

I'd suggest this paper for a quick introduction:

http://research.sun.com/projects/xacml/POLICY06_paper.pdf


Fabian


Bijan Parsia wrote:
> 
> Title -
>         Policy assertion equivalence and generality
> 
> Description -
>         Policy assertions are domain specific and opaque from the point 
> of view
> of the operators. However, there are certain relations between 
> assertions that
> could be asserted without breaking that opacity. For example, a policy 
> writer
> could know that, from their point of view, two assertions were exactly the
> same, or that one was a more general version of the other. For example, one
> might want to specify that some form of reliable messaging is required, 
> without
> specifying which specific forms.
> 
> Justification -
>         Equivalence pretty much falls out of subsumption/generality. Let me
> focus on generality.
> 
>         Having assertions related by subsumption allows one to write  
> *general*
> policies that can be refined in particular cases. It also allows one to
> *organize* policies in a hierarchy. Thus, even if the only policies one 
> deploys
> are fully specific, it can be useful to group policies by their semantics.
> 
> Target -
>         framework
> 
> Proposal -
>         One would need two new operators, and a place to put them. 
> Perhaps a
> header element, which could be external to the policy (thus shared by 
> many).
> <http://www.mindswap.org/2005/services-policies/> shows how to use policy
> subsumption.
> 


-- 
Fabian Ritzmann
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Stella Business Park             Phone +358-9-525 562 96
Lars Sonckin kaari 12            Fax   +358-9-525 562 52
02600 Espoo                      Email Fabian.Ritzmann@Sun.COM
Finland

Received on Friday, 25 August 2006 16:56:01 UTC