- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 19:32:12 -0700
- To: "public-ws-policy@w3.org" <public-ws-policy@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <C9BF0238EED3634BA1866AEF14C7A9E55A59955894@NA-EXMSG-C116.redmond.corp.microsoft>
Title: Guidelines - BP 1 and 21 are Duplicates Description: The following two best practices and their narratives are duplicates. a) [1] "Although a policy assertion may be constrained to a specific set of policy subjects by Assertion Authors, its semantics should not be dependent upon the mechanism by which the policy expression is attached to a given policy subject. For instance, an assertion "Foo" has the same semantics when attached to an operation policy subject regardless of whether it was attached using XML element policy attachment or the external URI attachment mechanism. Independence from a specific attachment mechanism allows policy tools to choose the most appropriate mechanism to attach a policy without having to analyze the contents of the policy. Best Practice 1: Semantics Independent of Attachment Mechanisms The semantics of a policy assertion should not depend on the attachment mechanism used." b) [2] "The Policy attachment mechanism used to communicate the policy assertions should not affect or imply additional semantics in the interpretation of Policy alternatives. If it did, each policy assertion would need to be written with different (and possibly unknown) attachment mechanisms in mind. Best Practice 21: Reusable Assertions Assertion Authors are encouraged to create policy assertions that can be used regardless of attachment mechanism." Justification: minimize the number of best practices. Target: Guidelines Proposal: attached is a concrete proposal to resolve the issue. Regards, Asir S Vedamuthu Microsoft Corporation
Attachments
- text/html attachment: bp1-and-21-are-duplicates.htm
Received on Saturday, 13 October 2007 02:32:34 UTC