- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:31:07 -0800
- To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>, "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
Thank you for updating the proposal. At the recent F2F, WG discussed the idea of adding a health warning to the EndOfLife assertion example (just as other hypothetical constructs in the Primer). Concretely, this is a minor editorial change: s/The example below shows Contoso version 2 policy expression with ignorable EndOfLife Assertion/The example below shows Contoso version 2 policy expression with a hypothetical ignorable EndOfLife 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 David Orchard Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 6:43 PM To: public-ws-policy@w3.org Subject: Bug 4270: Primer versioning example I created the bug and updated the example to explain the advantages of having the EOL assertion in the very first alternative as well as the trade-off between lax and strict. http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4270 Cheers, Dave
Received on Wednesday, 31 January 2007 00:31:22 UTC