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

[bill parducci <bill@parducci.net>]

>>...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").
>


help me understand this, evaluating the following using this logic


t AND n/a

is reduced to

t

which evaluates to TRUE. therefore,

t AND n/a = t

bottom line: if 'n/a' means 'do not consider when resolving' it 
evalutates to TRUE when used in an AND clause in terms of *functional* 
equivalency. can you give me an exmaple otherwise?

b