This mail is addressed to implementors of potential "attesting implementations" (any others, please speak up!). Let "attesting implementation" mean an implementation being done by or for an OASIS organizational member that plans to attest to "successfully using" the XACML 1.0 specification (defined as "passing the Conformance Test Suite") by December 12. I believe the XACML TC must decide on two issues very soon if we are to have 3 attesting implementations: The two issues are: 1. "<type>-map" vs. "map" functions The specification currently uses a single "map" function. The proposed change is to use "<type>-map" functions for each of the primitive types. 2. The order of the arguments in a Match element. The specification currently uses Match(AttributeDesignator,AttributeValue). The proposed change is to use Match(AttributeValue,AttributeDesignator). If you are an attesting implementation, would you be able to adapt your implementation by December 12 if the TC decides to make these changes on: Dec. 2: <type>-map? Dec. 2: Match(AttributeValue,AttributeDesignator)? Dec. 5: <type>-map? Dec. 5: Match(AttributeValue,AttributeDesignator)? Dec. 9: <type>-map? Dec. 9: Match(AttributeValue,AttributeDesignator)? If we have not made a decision by the last date where at least 3 of you could adapt by December 12, then it seems to me we have to live with the current specification or else slip our standardization schedule by one month. Some Conformance Test nitty details: The TC has said there will be no new Conformance Tests required for "successfully using" added after the end of November, although we can fix bugs in existing Conformance Tests. I think this means that, if the TC decides to accept "<type>-map", I will simply delete the existing "map" test. There would be no tests for "<type>-map" that would be required to be "successfully using". Perhaps if at least 3 attesting implementations were willing to have <type>-map tests added after the end of November, then we could do it. If the TC decides to accept "Match(AttributeValue,AttributeDesignator)", then I believe it would be possible to change the order of the Match arguments in the existing tests after the end of November under the category of "fixing bugs". 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