Re: [xacml] New issue#1 from "Boolean Policy resolution"

[Polar Humenn <polar@syr.edu>]

On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, bill parducci wrote:

> ...which in the context of granting access is the functional equivalent
> of setting N/A = TRUE.
>
> t + n/a = t

Not so, the semantics is that the policy does not apply.
We are working with a 3 valued logic (4 if we include evaulation error).

f or n/a = f,  (i.e. n/a is not "set" to "true").

-Polar

> b
>
> Polar Humenn wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > The basic crux is that getting a NOT-APPLICABLE in the equation is as if
> > its the NOT-APPLICABLE value isn't even there. For instance,
>
> [...]
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>