[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes of Focus Group Meeting 25 March 2004
Attendees: Anne Anderson Tim Moses Simon Godik Polar Humenn 1. Updated Work Item Index Tim needs an updated Work Item Index so he can reference the e-mail containing it in his next draft. The draft would reflect the state of items in that list. Anne may be able to issue update today, but will do by Tuesday otherwise. 2. Deadline for action items for XACML 2.0 The group decided that 12 April 2004 would let Tim get a new 2.0 draft out prior to the 28-29 April Face-to-Face. 3. WI#10. Parameters for Combining Algorithms Polar: do we want to be able to distinguish more than one parameter per rule? Current proposal supports only one (the one could be multi-valued). I.e. should we support a sequence of parameters per rule? Polar: Do we want to bring the parameters into the type system? If so, we could allow references. Currently, if contains references to variables, combining algorithm would have no way to get those unless the PDP evaluated the expression and checked type correctness prior to passing the result to the combining algorithm. Combining algorithm would have to be written with/as part of the PDP to have access to the context otherwise. If we now went with a parameter having "lax" content, could we later be backwards compatible if we add type information? Simon: probably not. Simon: each combining algorithm would develop its own schema for its parameters, so type would no longer be "lax" at that point. Polar: combining algorithm itself would have to know how to evaluate that completely, since PDP will not know the schema semantics. PDP won't know types to associate with elements. Tim: seems wrong for the combining algorithm to be reasoning about those kinds of things. Polar: if parameters are typed, then PDP can evaluate. Tim: I don't quite like these open content models. It is the PDP's job to serve up an "integer". Polar: we have all the machinery in the PDP for evaluating expressions. If you need something more complex, you can define a new DataType. Tim: So adding types does not add complexity? Polar: I think so. Simpler on implementation of combining algorithm. Simon: Look at Michiharu's example. You would have <AttributeValue>...</AttributeValue>. More use cases would be helpful. Polar: schema change is easy. Change "lax" content reference to "XACML expression", just like what goes into an "Apply". Simon: "Apply" content is a sequence of expressions. Tim: immediate action on this is in Simon's court. Simon: Could Polar work up a use case? Polar: Yes, but may take a while. 4. Organization of schema files Tim asked about how schema files should be organized. Currently follow class structure. Would alphabetical be more useful? No preference, so Tim will leave as is. Anne -- Anne H. Anderson Email: Anne.Anderson@Sun.COM Sun Microsystems Laboratories 1 Network Drive,UBUR02-311 Tel: 781/442-0928 Burlington, MA 01803-0902 USA Fax: 781/442-1692
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]