Re: [xacml] XACML Issues List Version 01

[Pierangela Samarati <samarati@pinky.crema.unimi.it>]

Hi,

i share this feeling (incidentally, i brough it up in the last concall, 
and also in previous once). 
i was interpreting them more as "actions" than "conditions".

best
-p


On Wed, 9 Jan 2002, bill parducci wrote:

> i know that it is late to bring this up, but i find the term 'post 
> condition' unintuitive. typically, this phrase means the *state* of 
> something after an action, not something to be acted upon. it seems that 
> the way we are using the term implies quite a bit about the context of 
> what is being done.  (post what? where?) i think this is being 
> demonstrated by the discussions surronding the scope of said phrase.
> 
> in my mind, it would seem that something like 'adjunct policy' or 
> 'adjunct policy condition' would be more appropriate? just typing out 
> loud...
> 
> b
> 
> 
> > [PM-1-02] - The alternative view is that post-conditions must be 
> > executed if and only if the associated rule contributes to the permit 
> > decision.
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>