Re: [xacml-comment] XACML 2.0: Small error in dayTimeDuration

[bill parducci <bill@parducci.net>]

Hi Florian,

Can you post the sample datetime data you used to test this working  
and non-working cases?

thanks

b

On Sep 29, 2009, at 4:50 AM, Florian Huonder wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> In XACML 2.0 the definition of the urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:2.0:data- 
> type:dayTimeDuration contains a small error.
> In my opinion the regular expression does only allow one digit for  
> the day-part.
>
> Currently the regex looks like this:
> [-]?P(\p{Nd}D(T(\p{Nd}+(H(\p{Nd}+(M(\p{Nd}+(\.\p{Nd}*)?S
>             |\.\p{Nd}+S)?|(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)|(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)?|M(\p{Nd}+
>             (\.\p{Nd}*)?S|\.\p{Nd}+S)?|(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)|\.\p{Nd}+S))?
>             |T(\p{Nd}+(H(\p{Nd}+(M(\p{Nd}+(\.\p{Nd}*)?S|\.\p{Nd}+S)?
>             |(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)|(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)?|M(\p{Nd}+(\.\p{Nd}*)?S|\. 
> \p{Nd}+S)?
>             |(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)|\.\p{Nd}+S))
>
> In my opinion it should look like:
> [-]?P(\p{Nd}+D(T(\p{Nd}+(H(\p{Nd}+(M(\p{Nd}+(\.\p{Nd}*)?S
>             |\.\p{Nd}+S)?|(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)|(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)?|M(\p{Nd}+
>             (\.\p{Nd}*)?S|\.\p{Nd}+S)?|(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)|\.\p{Nd}+S))?
>             |T(\p{Nd}+(H(\p{Nd}+(M(\p{Nd}+(\.\p{Nd}*)?S|\.\p{Nd}+S)?
>             |(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)|(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)?|M(\p{Nd}+(\.\p{Nd}*)?S|\. 
> \p{Nd}+S)?
>             |(\.\p{Nd}*)?S)|\.\p{Nd}+S))
>
> (I added a + at the 13. position).
>
>
> By the way, in this section the titles are mixed up, Duration in  
> years and months <-> Durations in days and times.
>
> I don’t know how relevant this is for the TC because the most work  
> is put into XACML 3.0 I think.
>
> Regards,
> Florian