RE: [xacml] apr15 schema subcom issues

I like formal languages for formal verification, but they are not
necessarily good for giving directions to protocol implementers.
IETF, for example, uses textual descriptive language to describe
algorithms used in protocols.  While interoperability problems do
arise, I doubt that use of a formal language that few
implementers understand would reduce the interoperability
problems.  Let's not try to push the world into understanding
OCL; our job is to push the world into understanding XACML.

I continue to vote for use of "standard" procedural language
syntax, with a little descriptive comment.

Anne
-- 
Anne H. Anderson             Email: 
Sun Microsystems Laboratories
1 Network Drive,UBUR02-311     Tel: 781/442-0928
Burlington, MA 01803-0902 USA  Fax: 781/442-1692