RE: RE: [NEW ISSUE] 4566 Guideline G2 to be reconsidered

Hello Toufic,

Based on the Wed WG conference call, we are wondering if G2 could be split into two best practices:

G2-a) Assertion authors should define assertions for behaviors that are relevant to compatibility assessment, such as web service protocols that manifest on the wire.

G2-b) Assertion authors should recommend that assertions that are not relevant to compatibility assessment be marked with the wsp:Ignorable attribute.

Do they help to resolve issue 4566?

Regards,

Asir S Vedamuthu
Microsoft Corporation


From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Toufic Boubez
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 11:29 PM
To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: RE: [NEW ISSUE] 4566 Guideline G2 to be reconsidered

Proposed new wording:
"Whenever possible, Assertion Authors should try to define policy assertions for behaviors that are relevant to compatibility tests, such as web service protocols that manifest on the wire."
This recognizes the fact that it's not always possible (or desirable) to write assertions for behavior that manifests itself on the wire.

Toufic Boubez, Ph.D.
Chief Technology Officer
(o)  604.681.9377 x310
(m) 604.288.7970
[http://www.layer7tech.com/assets/images/20061005/layer7_logo.png]
Secure, Simplify, Scale your Web Services.

________________________________
From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org on behalf of Toufic Boubez
Sent: Thu 5/17/2007 11:33 PM
To: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: [NEW ISSUE] 4566 Guideline G2 to be reconsidered
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4566

Title: Guideline G2 to be reconsidered

Description: Guideline G2 [1], slated for Section 5.1 of the Guidelines document [2], reads: "An assertion author should define policy assertions for behaviors that are relevant to compatibility tests, such as web service protocols that manifest on the wire". It seems to me that this good practice has been overtaken by events around Ignorable (and maybe even the closed/open world discussion of late). As editor, I don't feel comfortable adding it to the guidelines document without further clarification from the workgroup.

References:
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy-eds/2007Apr/0074.html
[2] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.html#assertion-target


Toufic Boubez, Ph.D.
Chief Technology Officer
tboubez@layer7tech.com<mailto:tboubez@layer7tech.com>
  o.   (604) 681.9377 x310
  m.  (604) 288.7970

[https://mail.l7tech.com/exchange/tboubez/Drafts/RE:%20%5bNEW%20ISSUE%5d%204566%20Guideline%20G2%20to%20be%20reconsidered.EML/1_multipart/image001.gif]<http://www.layer7tech.com/>
Secure, Simplify, Scale your Web Services
XML Accelerator<http://www.layer7tech.com/products/page.html?id=68> | XML Data Screen<http://www.layer7tech.com/products/page.html?id=69> | XML Firewall & VPN<http://www.layer7tech.com/products/page.html?id=70> | XML Networking Gateway<http://www.layer7tech.com/products/page.html?id=71>