RE: NEW ISSUE (4263) [Primer] Inform domain specific processing of ignorability of assertions

Asir, 

I agree with you. Glen's expresses the intent better. 

--umit
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Asir Vedamuthu [mailto:asirveda@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, Feb 27, 2007 12:20 PM
> To: Yalcinalp, Umit; Fabian Ritzmann
> Cc: Frederick Hirsch; public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Subject: RE: NEW ISSUE (4263) [Primer] Inform domain specific 
> processing of ignorability of assertions
> 
> On the Jan 31st WG conference call, Glen made a similar 
> proposal (scrapping from the minutes):
> 
> 'Domain-specific processing could take advantage of any 
> information from the policy data model, such as the ignorable 
> property of a policy assertion'.
> 
> It appears that either Glen or Umit's proposal works. From a 
> reader point of view, Glen's proposal sounds cleaner.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Asir S Vedamuthu
> Microsoft Corporation
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yalcinalp, Umit [mailto:umit.yalcinalp@sap.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:16 PM
> To: Fabian Ritzmann; Asir Vedamuthu
> Cc: Frederick Hirsch; public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Subject: RE: NEW ISSUE (4263) [Primer] Inform domain specific 
> processing of ignorability of assertions
> 
> How about something like the following:
> 
> {Policy Data model is available to domain-specific processing that may
> take into account any aspect of the datamodel, such as the 
> wsp:Ignorable
> attribute.}
> 
> --umit
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> Fabian Ritzmann
> > Sent: Tuesday, Feb 06, 2007 11:54 AM
> > To: Asir Vedamuthu
> > Cc: Frederick Hirsch; public-ws-policy@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: NEW ISSUE (4263) [Primer] Inform domain specific
> > processing of ignorability of assertions
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I agree that any domain-specific processing would see Ignorable
> > attributes because they are part of the policy assertion.
> > Maybe we could
> > just add something simple to the end of the section like:
> >
> > "Domain-specific processing is aware of whether the assertions it is
> > processing were marked as Ignorable since they are part of
> > the assertion's data model."
> >
> >
> > Fabian
> >
> >
> > Asir Vedamuthu wrote:
> > >> "Domain specific processing should be made aware of
> > whether assertions
> > >> it is processing were marked as ignorable
> > >>
> > >
> > > Ignorable property of a policy assertion is captured in the
> > policy data model [1]. Policy intersection is computed at the
> > policy data model level and the parts of a policy assertion
> > is visible to domain specific processing. It is not clear
> > what additional information should be passed to domain
> > specific processing beyond these?
> > >
> > > [1] "An assertion MAY indicate that it is an ignorable
> > policy assertion (see 4.4 Ignorable Policy Assertions)" -
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-ws-policy-20061117/#rPolicy_Assertion
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Asir S Vedamuthu
> > > Microsoft Corporation
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> Frederick Hirsch
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 2:22 PM
> > > To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
> > > Cc: Hirsch Frederick
> > > Subject: NEW ISSUE (4263) [Primer] Inform domain specific
> > processing of ignorability of assertions
> > >
> > >
> > > Bugzilla: <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4263>
> > >
> > > The new text added to primer on ignorable (as in issue 4041
> > and noted in
> > > resolution  <http://www.w3.org/2007/01/18-ws-policy-
> > > irc#T22-08-44-1> ) should
> > > include explanation that domain specific processing should
> > be aware of
> > > ignorable marking of assertion. (Thread about proposal for 4041 at
> > > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Jan/
> > > 0187.html> )
> > >
> > > Proposal:
> > >
> > > Add  following text proposed to be added at end of new 
> section 3.4.1
> > > Strict and
> > > Lax Policy Intersection
> > >
> > > "Domain specific processing should be made aware of whether
> > > assertions it is
> > > processing were marked as ignorable since that may impact domain
> > > specific
> > > processing."
> > >
> > > [Note that this proposal is different from the following 
> text which
> > > was removed
> > > from the original proposal for 4041
> > >
> > > "When domain specific processing is to be performed in 
> strict mode,
> > > it is up to
> > > that domain specific processing to interpret the Ignorable
> > > rattribute. In lax
> > > mode it is not relevant since ignorable assertions are 
> not passed to
> > > the domain
> > > specific processing step of the intersection algorithm."]
> > >
> > > regards, Frederick
> > >
> > > Frederick Hirsch
> > > Nokia
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

Received on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 21:07:41 UTC