I thought I wrote one for the Glossary, didn't I?
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Tim Moses wrote:
> Colleagues - One other thing. Merely in the interests of stylistic
> consistency, why don't we have a succinct definition of "type unification"
> in the Glossary, and explain how to do it in that part of the specification
> where the concept is used? All the best. Tim.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Moses [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 9:40 AM
> To: 'Simon Godik';
> Subject: RE: [xacml] xacml 1.1 draft 1
>
>
> Colleagues - A handful of editorial comments.
>
> Lines 4 and 31. This is a committee spec., not an OASIS spec..
> Line 5. Perhaps, we should just assign a document id. Let's not wait for
> an OASIS numbering system.
> Lines 11 - 24. Needs updating. Also suggest removing email addresses.
> Also Appendix D.
> Line 995. Wrong font.
> Line 1950. " ... be combined by the algorithm specified by ..." becomes "
> ... be combined using the algorithm specified by ..." (Just removes
> repetition of "by").
> Line 2612. "The selected node is different from the node types listed
> above". But the list above contains constructor functions (according to
> line 2583).
> Lines 2635 - 2645. Non-normative language. In four place "is" should be
> "SHALL be".
> Lines 3107 - 3117 and lines 3130 - 3144. The phrases in the text don't
> match the phrases in the table. e.g. "At least one applicable" in the text,
> whereas "At least one rule value is its Effect" in the table.
> Lines 3172 - 3193. I am personally still not happy with this explanation.
> I don't have a specific proposal. But, one signal that something is wrong
> comes from the fact that in line 3175 we say that "A named attribute is the
> term for the criteria ...". But, in line 3180 we say that "A named
> attribute has specific criteria ...". Is "attribute instance" more
> descriptive than "named attribute"?
>
> I should point out that most of these comments apply to the original
> editor's work. All the best. Tim.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Godik [mailto:]
> Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2003 5:05 PM
> To:
> Subject: [xacml] xacml 1.1 draft 1
>
>
> Here is xacml 1.1 draft 1
>
> Please let me know if I left something out.
> Simon
>
>
