[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [xacml] Re: [batch #2] counter propoposal to 3-04
this discussion was precipitated by the request to raise concerns prior to voting to close the list off as a single batch. b On Fri, 2002-04-05 at 08:18, Tim Moses wrote: > Colleagues - Picking up on Polar's suggestion, why don't we argue about the > actual text that appears in Section 7.1 of v12? Why not propose new text > and explain why it is an improvement on what we have? All the best. Tim. > > ----------------------------------------- > Tim Moses > Tel: 613.270.3183 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: bill parducci [mailto:bill@parducci.net] > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 11:14 AM > To: xacml > Subject: RE: [xacml] Re: [batch #2] counter propoposal to 3-04 > > > exactly. this is why i suggest that we select something that is not > associated with any given vendor. my gut feeling is that the combiners > will be relatively simple and that c syntax should be sufficient. > > b > > On Fri, 2002-04-05 at 07:40, Ken Yagen wrote: > > The fact that it is pseudocode not executable code means that we should > not > > require it be possible to throw it in a JVM and compile it. I believe the > > proposal was just to provide a standard syntax that most people are > familiar > > with explain the algorithms. You don't need a syntax to write pseudocode, > > but since this is a collaborative process, it is beneficial to be > > consistent. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC