[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xacml] Groups - XACML v3.0 Related and Nested Entities Profile Version 1.0 uploaded
Hello Steven, Thanks for assembling the draft profile. You have put a great deal of work into this. Given that “domain” has fairly standard meaning in IT, would it be possible to use the term “scope” instead? I think it would work in this context, and prevent
unnecessary confusion. “Realm” also might be a less-used and less confusing term, but I think “scope” fits best. In the examples in section 5.2, I see “relationship-kind”, which seems to be quite a bit like
urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:3.0:ipc:subject:subject-to-organization-relationship. There is also “start-date”, which is similar to
urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:3.0:ipc:resource:effective-date For the sake of consistency, could we use the IPC style attributes, even in the examples, so we can keep those aligned? The examples in 5.3.1 regarding an “approved-export” table actually hint at the existence of behind-the-scenes attribute flattening, since in order to build
such a table, the list has to be compiled from interpretation of regulations, exceptions, and individual licenses. Is the intent to demonstrate a capability to import complex tables associated with regulations (such as the US Commerce Control List), and make
the table content available to policy authors? Thanks again for the contribution, John From: xacml@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xacml@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Steven Legg Submitter's message
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]