xacml — archive

RE: [xacml] Re: postpone vote on WSPL

From: Polar Humenn <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:37:00 -0000

 MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->

















xacml message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]








Subject: RE: [xacml] Re: postpone vote on WSPL




From: Polar Humenn <[email protected]>
To: Anthony Nadalin <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 09:35:24 -0400 (EDT)






On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Anthony Nadalin wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Anne,
>
> I would also have to object and say that is out of scope for the XACML TC
> and is expanding the charter which is not allowed. The document clearly
> talks about Policy in a general term.
>
> I'm also not sure what  you mean by "then perhaps we should start a new
> OASIS TC for it"
>
> As far as Polar's comment, time will tell as it did for Corba.

Just interested? What does this comment mean?

-Polar

>
> Anthony Nadalin | work 512.436.9568 | cell 512.289.4122
>
>
> |---------+---------------------------->
> |         |           Polar Humenn     |
> |         |           <[email protected]>  |
> |         |                            |
> |         |           09/17/2003 08:54 |
> |         |           AM               |
> |---------+---------------------------->
>   >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>   |                                                                                                                                              |
>   |       To:       Anne Anderson <[email protected]>                                                                                        |
>   |       cc:       Hal Lockhart <[email protected]>, bill parducci <[email protected]>, XACML TC <[email protected]>           |
>   |       Subject:  RE: [xacml] Re: postpone vote on WSPL                                                                                        |
>   >----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>
>
>
>
> My comments,
>
> I don't think the WSPL document is out of the scope of XACML.
> It is merely a strict profile of use of XACML for a particular
> application. SAML does this all the time, creating profiles, so
> that it will work with a particular technology, like web browsers.
>
> I've read the document, and although I don't condone web services as a
> viable efficient mechanism for backoffice communications, I don't see
> anything wrong with it.
>
> My $2 cents.
>
> Cheers,
> -Polar
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Anne Anderson wrote:
>
> > Colleagues,
> >
> > These were all private communications, based on a private straw
> > poll by myself of TC members.  While WSPL appears to have strong
> > support from a majority of TC members, it appears we do not have
> > the necessary 2/3 majority at this time.  Only one objector was
> > specific, saying WSPL is outside the scope of XACML and is
> > inconsistent with WS-Policy.  One early public comment was
> > received on the list, also claiming WSPL was outside the scope of
> > XACML.
> >
> > I am very much in favor of public discussion.  I again request
> > that objectors post their objections publicly to
> > [email protected] so that the editor and contributors
> > can attempt to resolve them.
> >
> > If the only objection is that WSPL is outside the scope of XACML,
> > yet members believe it meets the published requirements for a web
> > services policy language, then perhaps we should start a new
> > OASIS TC for it.
> >
> > Anne
> >
> > On 16 September, Hal Lockhart writes: RE: [xacml] Re: postpone vote on
> WSPL
> >  > From: "Hal Lockhart" <[email protected]>
> >  > To: "bill parducci" <[email protected]>,
> >  >    "XACML TC" <[email protected]>
> >  > Subject: RE: [xacml] Re: postpone vote on WSPL
> >  > Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:34:31 -0400
> >  >
> >  > I haven't seen anything on the list. I take it these have been private
> >  > communications. Can this discussion be shared on the list? The new
> OASIS TC
> >  > process emphasizes the importance of conducting TC discussions on the
> list.
> >  >
> >  > Hal
> >  >
> >  > >