RE: [xacml] E-mail vote results, and one outstanding question...

Title: RE: [xacml] E-mail vote results, and one outstanding question...

Colleagues - I support Anne's proposal.  All the best.  Tim.

-----------------------------------------

Tim Moses

Tel: 613.270.3183

-----Original Message-----

From: Anne Anderson [mailto:]

Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 2:55 PM

To: 

Subject: RE: [xacml] E-mail vote results, and one outstanding

question...

After seeing the OCL example, I also am very uncomfortable with

requiring OCL as our language for describing the semantics of

operators.

On the other hand, unqualified, arbitrary "pseudocode" is not

"crystal clear" when we are trying to specify platform

independent, interoperable implementations.

Could we use the pseudocode in 7.1, and add just enough text to

specify what the various elements in the pseudocode mean?

Something like

  The above pseudocode is interpreted as in common procedural

  languages such as C except for the following:

  1)  rule[] refers to the array of rules in the <ruleSet>;

      policy[] refers to the array of policies in the

      <policySet>.

  2)  variable types are implicitly determined by the type of

      the value with which they are initialized.

  3)  a reference to rule[i] or policy[i] refers to the result

      returned when the specified rule or policy is evaluated.

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

----------------------------------------------------------------

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription

manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>