[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xacml] Draft Minutes - November 13
My appologies for not making the concall this morning. Unforunately, I got detained at the doctor's office this morning. > Seth: Status Issue - want to be able to specify attribute without value. > Anne: Already accepted this. > Hal: Want to have two definitions (one where value is required and one > where it isn't) This is the case where you need to specify the attribute in the return status as missing. Correct? As part of the input context, every <Attribute> MUST have a value, otherise, the "mustBePresent" semantics breaks down. We should probably have a new element that specifies it as a missing attribute specification as part of the output context not to get it mixed up with the <Attribute> element. Is that the way its going? BTW, I leave for England tomorrow for a week, so I will not be at the next concall. Cheers, -Polar
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]