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

Re: Issue 3619 - input from WS-Addressing WG

From: Sergey Beryozkin <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 14:24:14 +0100
Message-ID: <00c901c6cd00$c0b79a70$3901020a@sberyoz>
To: "Paul Cotton" <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Cc: "Maryann Hondo" <mhondo@us.ibm.com>, <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, "Bob Freund-Hitachi" <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>


The reconciliation with embedded/referenced WSDLs should happen irrespectively of whether a policy is attached to EPR through an 
embedded wsp:Policy or through a WS-Policy Attachment mechanism (as shown in the example in Section 3.4).

What is the algorithm for reconciling an embedded wsp:Policy with the WSDLs ? The same algorithm should be applied to a WS-Policy 
Attachment example.
If both EPR-embedded (wsp:Policy) and wsp:PolicyAttachment-attached policies are available at the same time then one of then should 
take precedence and then the chosen policy should be reconciled with WSDLs.

As a side question : why would someone have a policy attached to/embedded in EPR anyway ? What is the advantage of doing it (and 
hence requiring a policy consumer to go through a reconcilation process) instead of attaching it directly to a policy subject inside 
a corresponding WSDL definition ?


Sergey Beryozkin
Iona Technologies
Received on Thursday, 31 August 2006 15:44:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:33:14 UTC