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:  "[policy_vocabularyDefinition: 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#policy_assert
ion_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#policy_assert
ion_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_vocabulary
>  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#policy_assert
ion_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#policy_assert
ion_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_vocabulary
> ; 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_alternati
ve> ."

 

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_alternati
ve>  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