[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xacml] concrete proposal of condition reference (#7)
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Simon Godik wrote: > Hi Polar, > > [snip] > > Point #1: Should variable def be a sequence of expressions or just an > expression? I agree, variable-def should be valid > expression, so it's just one expression, not many. Okay. Good. > Point #2: Should <Function> be made into <Expression>?. The problem I see is > that by itself > <Function> does not have any meaning, it needs to be attached to <Apply>, so > that's why I created <HigherOrderApply>. > If you feel strongly that <Function> should be made into expression, I will > not object to it. We can adopt schema that you > propsed in your other message, with <Function> derived from <ExpressionType> > with FunctionId attribute. I do feel strongly about it. You may indeed invent extension higher order functions that may take two <Function> elements at arbitrary argument positions. Your HigherOrderApply assumes that the higher-order function applies exactly one function to its other arguments in a certain way. > Here is a schema with both changes applied. It believe it looks good. -Polar
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]