RE: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary?

Hi Maryann:

> I think the problem is that the assertions are really trying 
> to express a constraint .....and should be something 
> like "nonAnonymousONLY".  so the absence, is not the absence 
> of support but rather the absence of the constraint. 

OK, I think I see your interpretation here - this is very tricky stuff.
:)  As I understand it you're saying that it's OK to select the "empty"
version in the case where the provider doesn't specify a constraint
assertion (anon/non-anon), and that doing so simply means no constraint
exists at runtime.

Do you think we need to have WSA amend their spec in order to make this
more clear?

> I hope we can talk this through on the call. 



Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2007 14:54:23 UTC