OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xacml message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: RE: [xacml] [batch #2] counter proposal to 3-04

I tend to agree with Bill's point that the language should not be
vendor-specific. This is especially important if we want this standard
be ever supported across the industry. 

However, I'm not sure how much we can leverage a specific programming
language without getting trapped into the problem of providing
compilable code. Isn't it better to use some formal, such as  Z or OCL,
language for such things? See
http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~rej99/suprema/examples_main.htm for an example.


-----Original Message-----
From: bill parducci [mailto:bill@parducci.net]
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 11:14 AM
To: xacml
Subject: RE: [xacml] Re: [batch #2] counter propoposal to 3-04

exactly. this is why i suggest that we select something that is not
associated with any given vendor. my gut feeling is that the combiners
will be relatively simple and that c syntax should be sufficient.


On Fri, 2002-04-05 at 07:40, Ken Yagen wrote:
> The fact that it is pseudocode not executable code means that we
should not
> require it be possible to throw it in a JVM and compile it. I believe
> proposal was just to provide a standard syntax that most people are
> with explain the algorithms. You don't need a syntax to write
> but since this is a collaborative process, it is beneficial to be
> consistent.

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC