OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [regrep] [Proposed Change] Replace Association confirmation withreference access control

My opinion is that "who" makes the assertion is an essential part of the 
association.  Their views may not necessarily be 100% correct or agreed 
to by all parties since things like context of use can affect semantics. 
 I would support that someone can make a unilateral assertion and we 
have a mechanism whereby a reciprocal association can be declared or 
agreed to.

One issue may be manageability.  Imagine UBL puts its schema into a 
registry and gets 50,000 people each asserting via associations they 
"use" certain objects.  The owner of UBL in that registry may not want 
the responsibility of having to respond to each and every case.

My $0.02


Farrukh Najmi wrote:

> I am working actively on the 2.9 spec (precursor to 3.0). In version 
> 2.5 and earlier we have a concept of
> Association Confirmation as defined in section 8.6 of ebRIM 2.5. The 
> idea is that in an extramural association
> (association between objects owned by different parties) if I create 
> an association with someone else's object
> they MUST confirm that association in order for it to be fully valid. 
> There are clumsy ways to confirm and
> unconfirm an extramural Association described in 8.6.2 and 8.6.3.
> In version 2.9 we will add clarifications to the XACML feature to 
> define precisely how fine grained access
> control can control WHO gets to REFERENCE a RegistryObject and under 
> what circumstances. The WHO is
> the Subject, the REFERENCE is the Action and the RegistryObject is the 
> resource.
> For example you will be able to define an ACP that say:
> I allow a reference to my object to be created only if all the 
> following conditions are met:
> a) The subject making the reference has role "ProjectLeader"
> b)  that reference is from an Association instance
> c) the reference is being made via the sourceObject property of 
> Association
> d) the value of the associationType attribute in association 
> identifies the "Supercedes" associationType
> Given this powerful and flexible capability it seems very clumsy and 
> unnecessary to have the
> existing Association confirmation feature.
> I would like to propose that we remove Association Confirmation 
> feature and instead leverage the
> reference Access Control feature to control who can create an 
> extramural association to someone else's
> objects. This simplifies the spec greatly and can also be another 
> example where our specs use a few
> good primitive features to support higher level features or requirements.
> Thoughts?

Senior Standards Strategist
Adobe Systems, Inc.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]