- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 08:55:33 -0700
- To: Sergey Beryozkin <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>, <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
> it's important to ensure > policy-aware clients which have no knowledge > of these assertions can proceed > consuming the service advertsing this assertion. I'd like to understand this case better. Let's consider a slightly different example. Say provider X has an open privacy policy (X collects personal information and sells them). Provider X uses a policy assertion Y to advertise this behavior. Requestor Z doesn't understand assertion Y. I can't think of a reason why requestor Z should interact with provider X. > marking assertions like <oasis:Replicatable/> with > wsp:optional is considered to be a wrong approach. Agree. Regards, Asir S Vedamuthu Microsoft Corporation From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sergey Beryozkin Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 2:15 AM To: public-ws-policy@w3.org Subject: NEW ISSUE :Clarify usage of assertions with no behavioral requirements on the requeste http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3789 Target : WS-Policy Framework and policy guidelines Justification : There's a class of policy assertions which have no behavioral requirements on the requester but can be still usefully processed by requesters which are aware of what assertions mean. For example : <oasis:Replicatable/> An assertion like this one can be a useful source of information for requesters. Providers having expected properties like <oasis:Replicatable/> can be chosen/searched. At the same time, given the fact assertions like <oasis:Replicatable/> have no behavioral requirements on the provider it's important to ensure policy-aware clients which have no knowledge of these assertions can proceed consuming the service advertsing this assertion. Currently the way to advertise such an assertion is to use a normal form with two policy alternatives(simple case), with only one alternative containing this assertion thus making it optional, or, in other words, giving a chance to requesters to ignore it. Such normal form expression is equivalent to a compact form with the optional assertion marked with wsp:optional attribute with a value 'true'. However, at the moment the primer recommends using wsp:optional when one needs to mark asssertions which identify optional capabilities/requirements with behavioral requirements on a requester should the requester wishes to use it. Thus marking assertions like <oasis:Replicatable/> with wsp:optional is considered to be a wrong approach. Proposal : Clarify the text describing the optionality in the policy guidelines and in the Framework spec on how a policy author should use assertions like <oasis:Replicatable/>. It's important that assertions like these can be usefully interpreted by knowledgeble requesters and safely ignored by requesters unaware of them.
Received on Wednesday, 18 October 2006 15:56:31 UTC