- From: ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 13:59:10 -0700
- To: Sergey Beryozkin <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>
- CC: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Sergey, is this a reference to a single assertion? Ashok Sergey Beryozkin wrote: > Hi > > I'd like to suggest a possible simple policy language extension for > the *next version* of WS-Policy. > Please consider this request as a low-priority issue, I don't want to > distract the working group from more important/urgent things it needs > to finalize. If the groups find this suggestion of any interest then > the only thing I'd expect is a list of v.next issues be updated. > > So here it goes. If a policy author wants to express the simplies > capability/requirement, the most compact way to do it is to use a > compact form, for ex : > > <Policy> > <wsm:MTOM/> > </Policy> > > I personally have no problems with it at all, it's compact enough for > me and a Policy operaror provides for more than just serving as a > simple container about the primitive (<wsm:MTOM/>) policy assertion. > > Now, I've had a look recently at APP Feature Discovery Draft [1]. > According to the draft one can express a capability like this : > > <f:feature xmlns:f="http://purl.org/atompub/features/1.0" > ref="http://purl.org/atompub/features/1.0/supportsDraft" /> > /> > > I think it's kind of neat. It's simple and compact. It reminds me of > those SAX properties. > > I don't think one can express primitive assertions the same compcat > way using a WS-Policy language. > I don't see it a language limitation but at the same time it seems it > would be good if one could go as compact > as suggested in the Atom draft[1] using the policy language. > > The language has a PolicyReference (and PolicyURIs attribute) but I > believe its semantics require the policy engine to dereference the > reference. > > So what about introducing, say, a top-level element <PolicyAssertion>. > It can be used like this, compact form: > > <wsp:PolicyAssertion > namespace="http://purl.org/atompub/features/1.0/supportsDraft" > xmlns:wsp="http://www.w3.org/ns/ws-policy > <http://www.w3.org/ns/ws-policy%22/>"/ > <http://www.w3.org/ns/ws-policy%22/>> > > Normalization : > > <Policy> > <ExactlyOnce> > <All> > <ns:PolicyAssertion > xmlns:ns="http://purl.org/atompub/features/1.0/supportsDraft > <http://purl.org/atompub/features/1.0/supportsDraft%22/>"/ > <http://purl.org/atompub/features/1.0/supportsDraft%22/>> > </All> > </ExactlyOnce> > </Policy> > > Similarly, a top level Policy(Assertion) attribute is introduced : > > <atom:collection > wsp:PolicyAssertion="http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com/2007/09/atom-and-ws-policy.html"/>, > normalization rules are the same. > > What can it give : > * more compact way to express simple primitive assertions > > The normalization rule may seem like a hack, not sure about it. > Perhaps saying that PolicyReference does not always have to be > dereferenced may do the trick. > > Does it make any sense to anyone ? > > This message is not driven by any internal requirements, and I'm not > expecting any support for it, but I'd just like experts's opinion on > this proposal for the next version of the spec. > > I've tried to motivate it all at [2] > > Cheers, Sergey > > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-atompub-feature-10 > [2] http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com/2007/09/atom-and-ws-policy.html > >---------------------------- >IONA Technologies PLC (registered in Ireland) >Registered Number: 171387 >Registered Address: The IONA Building, Shelbourne Road, Dublin 4, Ireland > > -- All the best, Ashok
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2007 21:01:25 UTC