MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
xacml message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: FW: [xacml] Re: [xacml-comment] D024
I didn't say whether the scenario was valid XACML, but it valid XML, isn't
it? Isn't that enough criteria? Some SAX/DOM parser can handle it, right?
My point is, if we actually have conformance tests for badly formed
policies of a certain ilk, then why not have conformance tests for other
badly formed policies?
-Polar
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Daniel Engovatov wrote:
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <Policy/>
>
> against
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <RequestContext/>
>
> Both structures are valid XML, aren't they? What would a compliant valid
> PDP evaluate this scenario to?
>
> --------------
>
> They are not, not according to this schema:
>
> <xs:element name="Policy" type="xacml:PolicyType"/>
> <xs:complexType name="PolicyType">
> <xs:sequence>
> <xs:element ref="xacml:Description" minOccurs="0"/>
> <xs:element ref="xacml:PolicyDefaults"
> minOccurs="0"/>
> <xs:element ref="xacml:Target"/>
> <xs:element ref="xacml:Rule" minOccurs="0"
> maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
> <xs:element ref="xacml:Obligations" minOccurs="0"/>
> </xs:sequence>
> <xs:attribute name="PolicyId" type="xs:anyURI"
> use="required"/>
> <xs:attribute name="RuleCombiningAlgId" type="xs:anyURI"
> use="required"/>
> </xs:complexType>
>
>
> In any case it is not the issue of the document validity - but the issue
> that the policy exists (and can be "compiled" and accepted independent of
> the data context, in the general case.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC