Re: Comment on: NEW ISSUE 4654-- Guidelines for Policy Attachment

I agree with this minor revision. Thanks.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Maryann Hondo <mhondo@us.ibm.com> 
Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 3:08 pm 
Subject: Re: Comment on: NEW ISSUE 4654-- Guidelines for Policy Attachment 
To: "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM> 
Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org, public-ws-policy-request@w3.org 

> Monica, 
> one minor question below in this pen and <mh> (in case the color 
> doesn't 
> work) 
> 
> Maryann 
> 
> 
> 
> "Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM> 
> Sent by: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org 
> 06/26/2007 12:36 PM 
> 
> To 
> Maryann Hondo/Austin/IBM@IBMUS 
> cc 
> public-ws-policy@w3.org 
> Subject 
> Comment on: NEW ISSUE 4654-- Guidelines for Policy Attachment 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >Maryann Hondo wrote: Following up on my AI to open multiple bugs 
> relative 
> to this diff document.... 
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws- 
> policy/2007Jun/0033.html> 
> >I opened this one for the item......Guidelines for Policy Attachment 
> >        http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4654 
> > 
> To followup and refine my point in last week's call related to 
> Best 
> Practice 24 in Section 5.7. I'd suggest two editorial revisions 
> that 
> will make the Best Practice clearer. See earlier in Section 5.7: 
> 
>    * Change from: "This is illustrative of how the assertion 
> author can 
>      specify additional constraints and assumptions for 
> attachment and 
>      engagement of behavior. Such additional constraints must be 
>      clearly specified by the assertion authors." 
> <mh> I thought we agreed to not have the term "domain assertion 
> author" 
> and to only have "assertion author" 
>    * Change to: "This is illustrative of how the domain assertion 
>      author can specify additional constraints and assumptions for 
>      attachment and engagement of behavior in addition to the 
>      capabilities specified in WS-PolicyAttachment [link]. Such 
>      additional constraints must be clearly specified by the 
> assertion      authors." 
> 
> And, with the specification Best Practice 24 to support emphasis 
> of 
> point above: 
> 
>    * Change from: "If an assertion can be attached at multiple points 
>      within a policy subject, an assertion author should specify a 
>      preferred attachment point for the chosen policy subject." 
>    * Change to: "If an assertion can be attached at multiple points 
>      within a policy subject, an assertion author should specify a 
>      preferred attachment point for the chosen policy subject within 
>      their domain specification." 
> 
> Thank you. 
> 
> 
> 
>