[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xacml] xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-02-en.doc Spec Review
Kim, Should the "Previous Version" be the latest working draft, latest committee draft or latest Oasis standard? I cannot find any guideline for this, so I assumed that is the latest Oasis standard since most people would not think of that the previous version before XACML 3.0 is "XACML 3.0 working draft 15", rather the would think that the previous version is 2.0. In either case, you said in your review that there was no problems in xacml-3.0-core-spec-cd-02-en.doc, which lists XACML 2.0 as the previous version. So, either: 1. "Previous version" should be the previous working/committee draft version, in which case all documents are wrong (since they say 2.0) 2. "Previous version" should be the latest Oasis standard, in which case all documents are ok (since there was no previous Oasis standard of xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-02-en.doc, so it should be N/A) Best regards, Erik On 2010-02-24 15:01, Kim Goolsby wrote: > 1. Previous Version: > Should read as follows: > http://docs.oasis-open.org/xacml/3.0/xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-1-en.html > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/xacml/3.0/xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-1-en.doc > (Authoritative) > http://docs.oasis-open.org/xacml/3.0/xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-1-en.pdf > > > 2. Related Work: Should include URI [this change is optional] > > 3. Remove 'Latest Approved Version:'