Some issues in 3.0 core wd 5

All,

I just posted a new 3.0 core working draft. Here are a couple of minor 
issues which I thought I should bring to your attention:

- It seems to me that the text in section 5.39 contradicts the text in 
section 7 regarding the action of the PEP in case of unrecognized 
obligations. 5.39 mandates a deny action, while 7 specifies more 
alternatives based on a PEP "bias".

- There is a strange data type encoding in the sample rule in section 
4.2.4.2. Is that right?

- I have removed the text "Normative" from the main section headings 
since the OASIS template stated that all text is normative unless 
otherwise noted.

- The glossary term "Type unification" is not used anywhere besides in 
the definition of the term "Type unification". Could we remove it?

- I made my own style for the glossary terms since I didn't find 
anything suitable in the OASIS template. I hope it is ok for the OASIS 
style people. :-)

Best regards,
Erik