RE: [xacml] Minutes of 20 May 2004 XACML Focus Group

["Daniel Engovatov" <dengovatov@bea.com>]

>And people are more likely to come up with
>idiosyncratic ways of representing resources that could have been
>represented in a common format.

Exactly!  And they will not be happy with us forcing them into any
particular naming convention - which we have no expertise, or need to
define.

I sincerely doubt that we can/should invent yet another
standard/language within XACML.  Every attempt I have heard about for
"universal" naming convention, beyond a unique label, was a major PITA.

Both "ancestors" and Xpath do cover the basic use case within an already
defined constructs in XACML (mandatory and optional).   No new
restrictions, rule or guidelines are needed.

Daniel.