- From: Fabian Ritzmann <Fabian.Ritzmann@Sun.COM>
- Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 12:16:54 +0300
- To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Prasad Yendluri wrote: > > One more thing. The spec clearly states that “an assertion with > optional=true” is syntactic simplification to having two policy > alternatives, one with and one without the assertion. > Disregarding the semantics for a moment, I've never been entirely clear what the benefit is of "normalizing" an optional assertion into two policy alternatives? As far as I can see, the same goal could be achieved by these rules: - The intersection of an assertion with optional=true with the same assertion with optional=false yields the assertion with optional=false. - The merge of an assertion with optional=true with the same assertion with optional=false yields the assertion with optional=true. Fabian -- Fabian Ritzmann Sun Microsystems, Inc. Stella Business Park Phone +358-9-525 562 96 Lars Sonckin kaari 12 Fax +358-9-525 562 52 02600 Espoo Email Fabian.Ritzmann@Sun.COM Finland
Received on Friday, 29 September 2006 09:16:57 UTC