4262 2007-01-18 22:02:42 +0000 [Guidelines] Use of @wsp:optional and @wsp:Ignorable on the same assertion 2007-04-10 21:06:56 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WS-Policy Guidelines LC All All RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal --- 1 prasad.yendluri prasad.yendluri prasad.yendluri public-ws-policy-qa oldest_to_newest 13698 0 prasad.yendluri 2007-01-18 22:02:42 +0000 The framework specification does not explicitly state if an assertion can be marked both optional and ignorable. However, as we discussed since @wsp:optional is just a syntactic simplification, it is permitted to mark an assertion with both the @wsp:optional and @wsp:Ignorable with the value of "true" for both. I ask that the guidelines document add some guidance to clarify this aspect. Regards, Prasad 14424 1 chrisfer 2007-03-14 17:30:07 +0000 [13:28] scribe: RESOLUTION: Issue 4292 Accept proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Mar/0095.html and amended as follows change "is equivalent to two alternative" to "is equivalent to two alternatives in normal form". [13:28] cferris: rrsagent, where am i? [13:28] RRSAgent: See http://www.w3.org/2007/03/14-ws-policy-irc#T17-29-32 14543 2 monica.martin 2007-03-26 22:45:07 +0000 Another issue was to be opened as a result of resolution of Issue 4262 related to Primer and questions on understandability and mode. To optimize, this was combined with the complementary resolution to Issue 4393. Proposal (for Issue 4393 that includes minor change to resolve Action 256): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Mar/0120.html Issue 4393: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4393 Action 256: http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/wspolicy/actions/256 Changes specific to Action 256 are as follows: 1. Add at the end of Section 3.4.1, Primer just before the last statement on domain-specific processing (as a separate paragraph): Regardless of mode, the wsp:Ignorable marker does not affect the behavior of the client. If the resulting policy contains assertions marked with wsp:Ignorable, those assertions the client understands are not ignored. 2. Change/correct a bit of existing text in Section 3.4.1, Primer. Change from: When using the strict intersection mode ignorable assertions are part of the policy alternative vocabulary, so the |wsp:Ignorable| attribute does not impact the intersection result even when the |wsp:Ignorable| attribute value is “true”. Change to: When using the strict intersection mode, assertion marked with wsp:Ignorable are part of the policy alternative vocabulary, so the |wsp:Ignorable| attribute does not impact the intersection result even when the |wsp:Ignorable| attribute value is “true”. 14556 3 monica.martin 2007-03-28 00:26:59 +0000 Updated given comments 27 March 2007, see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Mar/0124.html 14672 4 monica.martin 2007-04-04 16:08:29 +0000 Update given comments until 4 April 2007, see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Apr/0004.html 14692 5 monica.martin 2007-04-10 21:06:56 +0000 Updated per comments, 10 April 2007: see, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2007Apr/0024.html