[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [xacml] E-mail vote results, and one outstanding question...
Colleagues - I support Anne's proposal. All the best. Tim.
-----------------------------------------
Tim Moses
Tel: 613.270.3183
-----Original Message-----
From: Anne Anderson [mailto:Anne.Anderson@Sun.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 2:55 PM
To: xacml@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xacml] E-mail vote results, and one outstanding
question...
After seeing the OCL example, I also am very uncomfortable with
requiring OCL as our language for describing the semantics of
operators.
On the other hand, unqualified, arbitrary "pseudocode" is not
"crystal clear" when we are trying to specify platform
independent, interoperable implementations.
Could we use the pseudocode in 7.1, and add just enough text to
specify what the various elements in the pseudocode mean?
Something like
The above pseudocode is interpreted as in common procedural
languages such as C except for the following:
1) rule[] refers to the array of rules in the <ruleSet>;
policy[] refers to the array of policies in the
<policySet>.
2) variable types are implicitly determined by the type of
the value with which they are initialized.
3) a reference to rule[i] or policy[i] refers to the result
returned when the specified rule or policy is evaluated.
Anne
--
Anne H. Anderson Email: Anne.Anderson@Sun.COM
Sun Microsystems Laboratories
1 Network Drive,UBUR02-311 Tel: 781/442-0928
Burlington, MA 01803-0902 USA Fax: 781/442-1692
----------------------------------------------------------------
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