RE: Suggested text to close Bug 3602

This looks good to me as well.

Daniel Roth

________________________________
From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ashok Malhotra
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 6:10 AM
To: Sverdlov, Yakov; Maryann Hondo
Cc: Monica J. Martin; public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: RE: Suggested text to close Bug 3602

I agree.  Let's use option 3 along with a pointer to the example.

All the best, Ashok


________________________________
From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sverdlov, Yakov
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 6:03 AM
To: Maryann Hondo
Cc: Ashok Malhotra; Monica J. Martin; public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: RE: Suggested text to close Bug 3602
Maryann,

I agree that the option 3 (with the Ashok's pointer to an example) is better than option 1.

Regards,

Yakov Sverdlov
CA

________________________________
From: Maryann Hondo [mailto:mhondo@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 8:50 AM
To: Sverdlov, Yakov
Cc: Ashok Malhotra; Monica J. Martin; public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: RE: Suggested text to close Bug 3602


Yakov and Ashok.

I think we're moving to consensus but I'd like you to consider this alternative text......

Maryann

Option 3:

When an assertion whose type is part of the policy's vocabulary is not included in a policy alternative, the policy alternative without the assertion type indicates that the assertion will not be applied in the context of the attached policy subject.



Option 1 ( from below)
"When an assertion whose type is part of the policy
> vocabulary but is not included in a policy alternative, the
> behavior indicated by that policy assertion is not applied to
> a subject in that policy alternative"
"Sverdlov, Yakov" <Yakov.Sverdlov@ca.com>

09/19/2006 01:23 PM

To

"Ashok Malhotra" <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>, "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>, Maryann Hondo/Austin/IBM@IBMUS

cc

<public-ws-policy@w3.org>

Subject

RE: Suggested text to close Bug 3602










+1 to Ashok

Thanks,
Yakov

-----Original Message-----
From: Ashok Malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:33 AM
To: Sverdlov, Yakov; Monica J. Martin; mhondo@us.ibm.com
Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: RE: Suggested text to close Bug 3602

Yakov:
I prefer option 1 because it makes it clear that the assertion should
NOT
be applied.  We should also add a pointer here to an example such as the
one
I proposed at the f2f which would appear later in the document after
optional
and alternative has been defined.

All the best, Ashok


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sverdlov, Yakov [mailto:Yakov.Sverdlov@ca.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 8:25 AM
> To: Monica J. Martin; Ashok Malhotra; mhondo@us.ibm.com
> Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Suggested text to close Bug 3602
>
> Action:
> http://www.w3.org/2006/09/14-ws-policy-minutes.html#action01
>
> I think in the spirit of the policy assertion definition, we
> may consider referencing the behavior represented by the assertion.
>
> Modify the proposal in the email below from:
> "When an assertion whose type is part of the policy
> vocabulary but is not included in a policy alternative, the
> provider does not apply that policy assertion in that policy
> alternative."
>
> To:
> Option 1:
> "When an assertion whose type is part of the policy
> vocabulary but is not included in a policy alternative, the
> behavior indicated by that policy assertion is not applied to
> a subject in that policy alternative"
>
> Option 2:
> "When an assertion whose type is part of the policy
> vocabulary but is not included in a policy alternative, the
> behavior [of an entity] indicated by that policy assertion is
> considered as undefined in that policy alternative"
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Yakov Sverdlov
> CA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Monica J. Martin
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 11:49 AM
> To: Ashok Malhotra
> Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Suggested text to close Bug 3602
> Importance: High
>
>
>
> ><new text>
> >For example, if there is a policy with an assertion marked with
> "optional='true'" this puts the assertion in the vocabulary
> of the policy.  When this policy is normalized the assertion
> appears in one alternative and not in the other.  If the
> alternative that does not include the assertion is chosen
> then it is explicitly prohibited to apply the assertion as
> the assertion is part of the policy vocabulary.
> >
> >
> mm1: Ashok, where this text falls in the specification, it is
> premature to discuss wsp:Optional, normalization and XML
> representation. In addition, this text duplicates existing
> material.  We could revise the existing text in Section 3.2:
>
>     Change from: An assertion whose type is part of the policy's
>     vocabulary but is not included in an alternative is explicitly
>     prohibited by the alternative.
>     Change to: When an assertion whose type is part of the policy
>     vocabulary but is not included in a policy alternative,
> the provider
>     does not apply that policy assertion in that policy alternative.
>
> An option to consider rather than another example is to
> reference further sections and include more detail in the
> Guideline and/or Primer documents. Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>