On 29 July, Anthony Nadalin writes: RE: [xacml] WSPL item for 7 August XACML TC Agenda
> My concern is that its been developed in a public standards body work group
> where there were concerns over RF, so has this been declared RF or does it
> carry same terms as XACML 1.0 ?
The author and contributors have not submitted any claims, and we
were obligated to do so by OASIS rules if we had any. So as far
as the author and contributors are concerned, it is RF. I see no
reason it should not be.
The two IPR claims submitted against XACML 1.0 have not been
submitted against the XACML Profile for Web-services. By the
way, it was never made clear how one of those claims actually
applied to XACML at all, while the other applied only to a
non-mandatory feature that is not used by the XACML Profile for
Web-services.
Again, if you are aware of any rights that have not been publicly
disclosed, please let us know.
Anne
--
Anne H. Anderson Email: Anne.Anderson@Sun.COM
Sun Microsystems Laboratories
1 Network Drive,UBUR02-311 Tel: 781/442-0928
Burlington, MA 01803-0902 USA Fax: 781/442-1692