- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 07:12:55 -0700
- To: William Henry <William.Henry@iona.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
I read through 30 e-mails on this topic. I didn't come across a technical reason why a provider would expose local or private policies (or configurations) to requestors. Regards, Asir S Vedamuthu Microsoft Corporation From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of William Henry Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:42 AM To: public-ws-policy@w3.org Subject: NEW ISSUE: New Attribute keyword to identify 'local' policies #3721 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3721 Title: New Attribute keyword to identify 'local' policies Justificaiton: As WS-Policy becomes more popular in use, policies not related to consumer/provider interaction are being defined by implementors. e.g. a provider processes use of caching data, or a consumers private identity management information. Though such policies should not be used in WSDL contract it is likely that such polices could make themselves visible where they are not to be used through attachment mechanisms (external XML files or UDDI etc.) I understand that his issue may have been raised before and the argument was that it was out of scope and that domains are responsible for defining such attributes. (e.g. WSDM) However this puts a burden on consumers to understand certain domain specifications or certain proprietary implementer policies. A service might be deemed unusable just because consumer doesn't understand some policy that is actually just a configuration policy for a local server. A more consistent and also efficient mechanism is required. Having a keyword e.g. wsp:local (or wsp:providerOnly, wsp:consumerOnly) allows consumers to ignore such policies. What an implementor does inside that policy then is up to them and is "invisible" to the consumer of the the policy as it will be ignored. So though it seems like it is not clear that we should do this in the charter it does allow a mechanism to make consumer/provider policies clearer - i.e. anything tagged with this attribute (e.g. wsp:local) can be ignored for consumer/provider interaction. Pushing it out to the domain specifications can leave a lot of ambiguity and therefore could effect our charter. Proposal Description Introduce the wsp:local attribute and explain that policies with this attribute do not effect consumer/provider interaction and should be ignored from calculating assertions for such interaction.
Received on Wednesday, 18 October 2006 14:13:59 UTC