[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: another first proposals to address the open issues No 4
Below and attached a first proposals to address the
open issues No 4. Proposal for issue No 4.: §
The
problem/unnecessary restriction: o
The signature of
any-of and all-of must be: §
any-of|all-of(function,
a primitive data type, bag) §
all-of-any|any-of-all|all-of-all(function,
bag, bag) §
map(function-WITH-ONE-Argument-ONLY,
bag) … returns bag o
Limitations occur
if the inside-function §
has more than two
(or one) parameter(s) §
doesn’t
have an inverse counter part 1.
Because of this
you might need to change the order of the last two parameters - in case of an
inside-function with two parameters) §
Proposal o
a more flexible definition
of any-of and all-of will eliminate the limitations (c.p. from line 4664). o
the any-of-any
function could be changed to a function where with exception of the first
parameter (that specifies a function over primitive data types) all following
parameter will be bags. The result will be true if the function applied to one
of the tupels of the cross product set evaluates to true. o
all-of-any, any-of-all,
all-of-all must be updated correspondingly… Problem: explosion of
functions due to increased number of parameters. o
map should also
allow for arbitrary functions and thus should be changed to c.p. 4862. §
example: add 5 to
every value in an integer bag would be expressed as: 1.
map(integer-add,
pointer-to-bag, 5) Two further comments: o
any-of-any
(all-of-all) with two bags where one bag has one element corresponds to the
any-of (all-of) function. o
any-of, all-of,
any-of-any, all-of-all start introducing some sort of loops in XACML. Why not
adding a for loop and maybe if-than-else constructs? Best regards jan |
xacml-3.0-core-spec-wd-12-en_inluding_proposals_for_issue_4_by_jan.doc
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]