MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
xacml message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xacml] Hierarhical resources.. part 0.1
From: "Daniel Engovatov" <>
To: "Seth Proctor" <>, <>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 17:59:14 -0700
>I think this captures the discussion thus far (mod some details about
>what the actual Request format should look like). Comments?
Overall - rather close. I guess I want to see the next iteration of
Anne's
Proposal before I make further suggestions.
In the example, I was thinking the "ancestors" (Adding "resource-" in
the name seems redundant - it is in the resource: namespace) should
normally include the resource-id: resource is its own ancestor. That
simplifies the most typical rule target: apply a rule to a resource and
all its dependants.
We are not trying to model resource structure. I think that our only
goal would be to define a useful scheme to specify applicable rules.
We definitely could reserve some useful names for the typical
hierarchical schemes, such as "resource-parents", but I would not think
they should be mandatory to define.
Daniel.
