Re: [xacml] RE: policy model, part 1

[bill parducci <bill@parducci.net>]

i have the same question. i *think* that what is meant here is what i 
think of as 'nullable' ('non existent value is valid'). if my assuption 
is true then sekhar's definition would be rephrased:

/*
So basically, the interpretation is that a LACK OF SUBJECT is EQUIVALENT 
TO AnySubject.
*/

...which, to answer the question, results in 'no value' being the 
representation of 'nil', er... 'null'

b

Polar Humenn wrote:

> Sekhar,
> 
> How is "nil" represented for "nillable".
> 
> -Polar