[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [sca-policy] Wording for Issue 24
|
The algorithm section (section 4.10) should be changed as follows: Now: A. Calculate the required intent set that applies to
the target element as follows: ... 6. If the set of intents includes both a qualified
version of an intent and an unqualified version of the same intent, remove the
unqualified version from the set. Add A7 as follows: 7.
Replace any remaining qualifiable
intents with the default qualified form of that intent, according to the
default qualifier in the definition of the intent. Delete Step H: H. If a required intent is unqualified and matches a
policySet that is also unqualified, then the intentMap entry for the qualifier
that is marked with default=”true” should be used. -----Original Message----- Good suggestion. Thanks! Ashok Natale, Bob wrote: > Hi Ashok, > > Concerning the wording of this paragraph from the top of p.2: > > "An intent that can be completely satisfied by one of a
choice of > lower-level intents is referred to as a qualifiable intent. In
order > to express such intents, the intent name may contain a qualifier,
“.”. > An intent that includes _the name of a qualifiable intent_ in its
name > is referred to as a qualified intent, because it is “qualifying”
how > the qualifiable intent is satisfied. A qualified intent can only > qualify one qualifiable intent, so the name of the qualified
intent > includes the name of the qualifiable intent as a prefix (separated
by > “.”), for example, authentication.message. See Usage of @requires > attribute for specifying intents." > > ...It seems that the 3rd sentence might be better stated as: > > "An intent that includes _a qualifier_ in its name is
referred to as a > qualified intent, because it is “qualifying” how the qualifiable > intent is satisfied." > > (Underline added just for clarity here -- not intended for the
actual > text.) > Cheers, > BobN > > -----Original Message----- > From: ashok malhotra [mailto: > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 8:42 AM > To: OASIS Policy > Subject: [sca-policy] Wording for Issue 24 > > As requested, I have created wording changes in sections 3.1 and
3.2 > of the > Policy Framework document to resolve issue 24.. Additional changes
may be > needed in other sections to indicate how the intent defaults would
be > used. We > need to discuss these changes. > -- > All the best, Ashok -- All the best, Ashok --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. You may a link to this group and 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]