Subject: Public Comment
Comment from: firstname.lastname@example.org Name: Joshua Shinavier Title: software developer Organization: Soph-Ware Associates Inc. Regarding Specification: oasis-xacml-1.0: A14.10 (Set functions) I'm curious whether it might be reasonable to generalize the standard intersection and union set functions to take an arbitrary number of arguments. It seems counter-intuitive to require intersection and union to be binary functions when there is no such restriction on the number of arguments to an "and" or an "or" (their behavior is defined for more than two, for one, and even for zero arguments). Apart from better conceptual elegance, arbitrary arity would also avoid unnecessary recursive nesting of Apply elements in intersections or unions of large numbers of expressions.