public-ws-policy@w3.org from May 2007 by date

Thursday, 31 May 2007

• RE: New issue on duplicate assertions of a single type in an alternative: 4583 Dale Moberg
• RE: New issue on duplicate assertions of a single type in an alternative: 4583 Ashok Malhotra
• RE: New issue on duplicate assertions of a single type in an alternative: 4583 Ashok Malhotra
• RE: BEA Reporting Interop Round 3 Test Results Symon Chang

Wednesday, 30 May 2007

• updated editors drafts Maryann Hondo
• [NEW ISSUE] 4592 Incorrect reference content Christopher B Ferris

Tuesday, 29 May 2007

• Re: Questions on normal forms David Hull
• RE: Questions on normal forms Ashok Malhotra
• Questions on normal forms David Hull

Saturday, 26 May 2007

• RE: Bug 4584 : Clarify how lax mode and ignorable assertions affect the intersection algorithm Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: BEA Reporting Interop Round 1, 2 and 4 Test Results Felix Sasaki
• Re: Oracle Round 3 Results Felix Sasaki

Friday, 25 May 2007

• RE: Bug 4584 : Clarify how lax mode and ignorable assertions affect the intersection algorithm Charlton Barreto
• RE: Bug 4584 : Clarify how lax mode and ignorable assertions affect the intersection algorithm Sergey Beryozkin
• Oracle Round 3 Results RAMANA.TURLAPATI@ORACLE.COM
• BEA Reporting Interop Round 1, 2 and 4 Test Results Symon Chang
• Re: Bug 4584 : Clarify how lax mode and ignorable assertions affect the intersection algorithm Christopher B Ferris
• Bug 4584 : Clarify how lax mode and ignorable assertions affect the intersection algorithm Sergey Beryozkin

Thursday, 24 May 2007

• WS-Policy Interop Report Doug Davis
• RE: New issue on duplicate assertions of a single type in an alternative: 4583 Paul Cotton
• New issue on duplicate assertions of a single type in an alternative: 4583 Ashok Malhotra
• Re: Additional lax intersection testing Christopher B Ferris
• Fw: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• Additional lax intersection testing Doug Davis
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• BEA Reporting Interop Round 3 Test Results Symon Chang
• BEA Reporting Interop Round 3 Test Results Symon Chang
• One more editorial suggestion David Hull
• Re: from the whiteboard f2f dicussion Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: WS-Addressing 1.0 Metadata second last call Christopher B Ferris
• [Fwd: [New Issue] Issue 4579: Context for Parent Policy Assertions and Nested Policy Expressions] Monica J. Martin
• [New Issue] Issue 4579: Context for Parent Policy Assertions and Nested Policy Expressions Monica J. Martin
• RE: from the whiteboard f2f dicussion Christopher B Ferris
• AI: Suggestions for explanation of normalization David Hull

Wednesday, 23 May 2007

• RE: from the whiteboard f2f dicussion Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: [Bug 4555] Should policy intersection be called policy intersection? David Hull
• from the whiteboard f2f dicussion Christopher B Ferris
• Re: [Bug 4554] Configurability and comformance of intersection algorithm David Hull
• Summary: Test Suite Issues Asir Vedamuthu
• FW: [Bug 4568] Incorrect namespaces in testcases Asir Vedamuthu
• FW: [Bug 4572] Typo in wsp:URI in wsdl2.0 for round4 Asir Vedamuthu
• Revised Open World/Closed World positions David Orchard
• RE: FW: [Bug 4567] Typo in wsdl2.0 attachment URIs Asir Vedamuthu
• FW: [Bug 4567] Typo in wsdl2.0 attachment URIs Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: [Bug 4554] Configurability and comformance of intersection algorithm Asir Vedamuthu
• Re: Reporting Interop / Unit Test Results 4 CR Dashboard Felix Sasaki
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Asir Vedamuthu
• FW: [Bug 4575] Minor Bugs in Round 2 WSDL 20 Test Cases from WSO2/Manjula Asir Vedamuthu
• Reporting Interop / Unit Test Results 4 CR Dashboard Asir Vedamuthu

Tuesday, 22 May 2007

• Re: FW: [Bug 4553] Exact meaning of "all of the assertions in both alternatives" David Hull
• [VER 2] Agenda: WS-Policy WG face-to-face meeting 42 - 2007-05-23 and 24 Christopher B Ferris
• Re: FW: [Bug 4553] Exact meaning of "all of the assertions in both alternatives" Christopher B Ferris
• RE: [NEW ISSUE] 4561 clarification of domain-specific processing Asir Vedamuthu

Monday, 21 May 2007

• [NEW ISSUE] 4573 [Guidelines] Uses Guidelines, Best Practices and Good Practices interchangeably Prasad Yendluri
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Tom Rutt
• One from column A and one from column B David Hull
• Updated Editor's Draft of WS-Policy 1.5 Guidelines Document Prasad Yendluri
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Monica J. Martin
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Tom Rutt
• Re: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? David Hull
• Re: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? David Hull
• Re: Comments on "normal form" of policy expressions David Hull
• Agenda: WS-Policy WG face-to-face meeting 42 - 2007-05-23 and 24 Christopher B Ferris
• RE: Client policy processing Christopher B Ferris
• RE: RE: WS-Addressing 1.0 Metadata second last call Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Asir Vedamuthu

Sunday, 20 May 2007

• RE: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Comments on "normal form" of policy expressions Paul Cotton
• RE: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Rogers, Tony
• RE: Client policy processing Ashok Malhotra
• FW: [Bug 4571] round2 wsdl2 needs QNames not NCNames Asir Vedamuthu
• Re: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? David Hull
• RE: Client policy processing Rogers, Tony
• RE: Client policy processing Rogers, Tony
• Re: Client policy processing Anthony Nadalin

Friday, 18 May 2007

• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions David Orchard
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• RE: WSDL 2.0 external attachment Asir Vedamuthu
• WSDL 2.0 external attachment Doug Davis
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions David Orchard
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Asir Vedamuthu
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Monica J. Martin
• Fw: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Maryann Hondo
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Tom Rutt
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• RE: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Snow, Skip
• [NEW ISSUE] 4566 Guideline G2 to be reconsidered Toufic Boubez
• RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions Anthony Nadalin
• RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions David Orchard
• RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions Anthony Nadalin
• RE: Action-297 - Example Policies that Don't Interesect Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Rogers, Tony

Thursday, 17 May 2007

• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Ashok Malhotra
• RE: [Bug 4555] Should policy intersection be called policy intersection? Ashok Malhotra
• Re: [Bug 4554] Configurability and comformance of intersection algorithm David Hull
• Re: [Bug 4555] Should policy intersection be called policy intersection? David Hull
• RE: [Bug 4555] Should policy intersection be called policy intersection? Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: WS-Addressing 1.0 Metadata second last call Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: [Bug 4554] Configurability and comformance of intersection algorithm Asir Vedamuthu
• WS-Addressing 1.0 Metadata second last call Paul Cotton

Wednesday, 16 May 2007

• Re: Utility of Ignorable? Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: Utility of Ignorable? Sergey Beryozkin
• WS-Addressing 1.0 Metadata second last call Bob Freund-Hitachi
• [NEW ISSUE] 4561 clarification of domain-specific processing Christopher B Ferris
• Re: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Frederick Hirsch
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions David Orchard
• Re: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? David Hull
• RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions David Orchard
• RE: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions Ashok Malhotra
• RE: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Ashok Malhotra
• Re: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions Sergey Beryozkin
• RE: Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• Re: FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? David Hull
• Re: FW: [Bug 4553] Exact meaning of "all of the assertions in both alternatives" David Hull
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Rogers, Tony

Tuesday, 15 May 2007

• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Snow, Skip
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Snow, Skip

Wednesday, 16 May 2007

• FW: [Bug 4552] Should the word "collection" be changed to something more specific? Asir Vedamuthu
• FW: [Bug 4553] Exact meaning of "all of the assertions in both alternatives" Asir Vedamuthu
• Action-297 - Example Policies that Don't Interesect Asir Vedamuthu
• Re: Agenda: WS-Policy WG distributed meeting 41 - 2007-05-16 Monica J. Martin
• Action 292: Minor Editorial Update on Versioning Text in Primer (New Issue 4559) Monica J. Martin
• Bug 4558: Scalability and performance problems with expressing allowable nested policy assertions David Orchard

Tuesday, 15 May 2007

• Re: Agenda: WS-Policy WG distributed meeting 41 - 2007-05-16 Monica J. Martin
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions David Orchard
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Rogers, Tony
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Rogers, Tony
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions David Orchard
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Tom Rutt
• RE: Agenda: WS-Policy interop F2F meeting 2 - 2007-05-23 to 2007-05-25 Paul Cotton
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Frederick Hirsch
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Rogers, Tony

Monday, 14 May 2007

• Performance problems with policy intersection Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Dale Moberg
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Maryann Hondo

Sunday, 13 May 2007

• Action-295 (was NEW ISSUE - 4556 Editorial Issue from David Hull Asir Vedamuthu
• [Bug 4553] Exact meaning of "all of the assertions in both alternatives" Paul Cotton
• [Bug 4555] Should policy intersection be called policy intersection? Paul Cotton
• Agenda: WS-Policy WG distributed meeting 41 - 2007-05-16 Paul Cotton
• [Bug 4554] Configurability and comformance of intersection algorithm Paul Cotton
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Felix Sasaki

Friday, 11 May 2007

• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris
• Extensions and policy intersection David Hull
• Re: Response to the Last Call comments by WS-Policy to the WS-Addressing Metadata document 1.0 Christopher B Ferris
• RE: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Ashok Malhotra
• Re: Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions Christopher B Ferris

Thursday, 10 May 2007

• Revised positions for closed/open world assumptions David Orchard
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Dale Moberg
• Re: AIN, NOBI and composition Sergey Beryozkin
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Dale Moberg
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Christopher B Ferris
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition David Orchard
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition David Orchard
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition David Orchard
• Re: AIN, NOBI and composition Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: AIN, NOBI and composition Sergey Beryozkin
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Ashok Malhotra
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Dale Moberg
• Re: AIN, NOBI and composition Frederick Hirsch
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Abbie Barbir
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Christopher B Ferris
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Ashok Malhotra
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Christopher B Ferris
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Christopher B Ferris
• Re: AIN, NOBI and composition Christopher B Ferris
• Re: WS-Policy and interopearbility (Was: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my!) Felix Sasaki

Wednesday, 9 May 2007

• Re: WS-Policy and interopearbility (Was: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my!) Anthony Nadalin
• RE: WS-Policy and interopearbility (Was: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my!) Daniel Roth
• RE: WS-Policy and interopearbility (Was: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my!) Ashok Malhotra
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Ashok Malhotra
• Alternative with neutral language for Issue 4544 (was RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my!) Dale Moberg
• RE: WS-Policy and interopearbility (Was: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my!) Daniel Roth
• Re: AIN, NOBI and composition Monica J. Martin
• Re: Utility of Ignorable? Monica J. Martin
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Daniel Roth
• Re: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Tom Rutt
• Re: Client policy processing Frederick Hirsch
• Re: Client policy processing Anthony Nadalin
• RE: Utility of Ignorable? David Orchard
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! David Orchard
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition David Orchard
• RE: Utility of Ignorable? Prasad Yendluri
• RE: [SPAM] Round 4 UDDI Prasad Yendluri
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: Utility of Ignorable? Sergey Beryozkin
• RE: WS-Policy and interopearbility (Was: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my!) Dale Moberg
• Re: Utility of Ignorable? Felix Sasaki
• Re: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Frederick Hirsch
• RE: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Katy Warr
• Re: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Tom Rutt
• RE: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Bob Freund
• RE: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Ram Jeyaraman
• (VER 2) Agenda: WS-Policy WG distributed meeting 40 - 2007-05-09 Christopher B Ferris
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Christopher B Ferris
• RE: Utility of Ignorable? Sergey Beryozkin
• WS-Policy and interopearbility (Was: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my!) Sergey Beryozkin
• RE: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Felix Sasaki
• Re: Utility of Ignorable? Felix Sasaki
• Re: Agenda: WS-Policy WG distributed meeting 40 - 2007-05-09 Monica J. Martin
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Anish Karmarkar
• Re: AIN, NOBI and composition Monica J. Martin
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Daniel Roth

Tuesday, 8 May 2007

• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Anish Karmarkar
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Daniel Roth
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition David Orchard
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Daniel Roth
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Ashok Malhotra
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Daniel Roth
• Re: AIN, NOBI and composition Monica J. Martin
• RE: AIN, NOBI and composition Daniel Roth
• WS-Policy 1.5 Primer Editors draft and Diff Prasad Yendluri
• AIN, NOBI and composition David Orchard
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Dale Moberg
• Client policy processing Frederick Hirsch
• Policy expression meaning different if in alternative? Frederick Hirsch
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! David Orchard
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Daniel Roth
• Round 4 UDDI Paul Denning
• RE: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Ashok Malhotra
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Ashok Malhotra
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! David Orchard
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Daniel Roth
• RE: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Daniel Roth
• RE: Utility of Ignorable? Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: ACTION-294 Ashok to open a CR issue with text to define "collection" Fabian Ritzmann
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Sergey Beryozkin
• RE: Utility of Ignorable? David Orchard
• RE: ACTION-294 Ashok to open a CR issue with text to define "collection" Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Response to the Last Call comments by WS-Policy to the WS-Addressing Metadata document 1.0 Daniel Roth
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Ashok Malhotra
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Monica J. Martin
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Ashok Malhotra
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Christopher B Ferris
• Re: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Sergey Beryozkin

Monday, 7 May 2007

• RE: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Bob Freund
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Frederick Hirsch
• RE: [Bug 4522] Namespace problems in the WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2.0 External Attachment Test Cases. Asir Vedamuthu

Friday, 4 May 2007

• No need for concept of assertion negation Tom Rutt
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Monica J. Martin
• Re: ACTION-294 Ashok to open a CR issue with text to define "collection" Monica J. Martin
• RE: ACTION-294 Ashok to open a CR issue with text to define "collection" Ashok Malhotra
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Sergey Beryozkin
• Re: ACTION-294 Ashok to open a CR issue with text to define "collection" Fabian Ritzmann
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Fabian Ritzmann
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Ashok Malhotra
• ACTION-294 Ashok to open a CR issue with text to define "collection" Ashok Malhotra
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Sergey Beryozkin
• RE: [Bug 4522] Namespace problems in the WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2.0 External Attachment Test Cases. Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Utility of Ignorable? Ashok Malhotra
• RE: [Bug 4522] Namespace problems in the WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2.0 External Attachment Test Cases. Asir Vedamuthu

Thursday, 3 May 2007

• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! David Orchard
• Utility of Ignorable? David Orchard
• 4414 finished David Orchard
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! William Henry
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Christopher B Ferris
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Felix Sasaki
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! David Orchard
• RE: [Bug 4522] Namespace problems in the WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2.0 External Attachment Test Cases. Ashok Malhotra
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Christopher B Ferris

Wednesday, 2 May 2007

• Agenda: WS-Policy WG distributed meeting 40 - 2007-05-09 Paul Cotton
• RE: Collections: Sets, bags or something else? Natale, Bob
• May F2F update hosted by Nortel Abbie Barbir
• RE: Collections: Sets, bags or something else? Abbie Barbir
• Re: Collections: Sets, bags or something else? David Hull
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Monica J. Martin
• Re: Ferris wsp 5/1/2007: 'Will Not be Applied' Monica J. Martin
• RE: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! David Orchard
• Re: Collections: Sets, bags or something else? David Hull
• Re: Editorial issues David Hull
• WSDL 1.1 External Attachment Tests Ashok Malhotra
• Re: Ferris wsp 5/1/2007: 'Will Not be Applied' Christopher B Ferris
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Felix Sasaki
• Re: policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Sergey Beryozkin
• [VER 2] Agenda: WS-Policy WG distributed meeting 39 - 2007-05-02 Paul Cotton
• RE: Action-288 (was RE: [Bug 4479] Editorial, note is obscure or unclear Bob Freund

Tuesday, 1 May 2007

• Ferris wsp 5/1/2007: 'Will Not be Applied' Monica J. Martin
• Re: Bug 4414 proposed - Relationship to Issues 4393 and 4292 Monica J. Martin
• Updated Interop Scenarios - Release 2 Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: Are nested assertions part of the policy vocabulary? Daniel Roth
• RE: Collections: Sets, bags or something else? Ashok Malhotra
• RE: Collections: Sets, bags or something else? Asir Vedamuthu
• RE: Editorial issues Asir Vedamuthu
• Action-288 (was RE: [Bug 4479] Editorial, note is obscure or unclear Asir Vedamuthu
• Bug 4414 proposed David Orchard
• policy vocabulary, will not be applied, oh my! Christopher B Ferris
• Editorial issues David Hull
• Collections: Sets, bags or something else? David Hull
• Comments on "normal form" of policy expressions David Hull

Last message date: Thursday, 31 May 2007 22:38:11 UTC