[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-policy] ISSUE-110 Suggested wording
We will have to discuss this in the call. Issue-79 explicitly changed the MUST to a SHOULD. The proposal even came from you Ashok. http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-policy/200909/msg00011.html If what you really want is to go back to a MUST then we need to re-open 79. Dave Booz STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC "Distributed objects first, then world hunger" Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093 e-mail:booz@us.ibm.com |------------> | From: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | To: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |oasis policy <sca-policy@lists.oasis-open.org> | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Date: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |12/14/2009 08:16 AM | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Subject: | |------------> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |[sca-policy] ISSUE-110 Suggested wording | >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Dave's suggested wording is: All intents in the required intent set for an element SHOULD be provided by the directly provided intents set and the set of policySets that apply to the element./ /[POL40018 <#POL40018>] If the combination of implementationType / bindingType / collection of policySets does not satisfy all of the intents which apply to the element, the configuration is not valid. The conformance statement is a SHOULD while the paragraph following it reads like a MUST. Anish argued last week that intents must be satisfied so it may be better to change the conformance statement to a MUST. Also, I suggest that the end of the second paragraph be extended to read "is not valid and an error MUST be raised". -- All the best, Ashok --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]