Re: [security-services] Comments on core-21

["Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com>]

At 03:23 PM 12/11/01 -0500, Eve L. Maler wrote:
>I just realized something: Conditions does *not* have an abstract type.  I 
>thought we wanted to force people to write an extension schema so that 
>their "mustUnderstand"-type semantics would be forced to be documented at 
>least a little.  But I may be behind the times.  Can this question be 
>added to the issue below?  Thanks.

Okay, I'm starting to get brain cramp.  Ignore; <Condition> (singular) 
*does* have an abstract type.  Sorry.
--
Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com