MHonArc v2.5.2 -->

















xacml message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [Elist Home]








Subject: RE: [xacml] Match/No-Match Semantics




From: Polar Humenn <polar@syr.edu>
To: XACML <xacml@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 22:14:32 -0400 (EDT)






On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Daniel Engovatov wrote:

> I agree that it was a wrong decision..
>
> Proposal:
>
> Treat Match evaluation as part of the rule evaluation, combined with
> the condition with an AND, according to the described AND semantics.
>
> So for a rule  for(... match()) if condition()
> evaluated expression is:  match() AND condition()
>
> With the result being processed by the rule recombination algorithm.
> So that Indeterminate in Match() will be treated as Indeterminate()
> result of a rule, applied.

This approach would work because a rule should be interpreted roughly as

	Target -> (Condition -> Effect)

where "->" is "implies" in classical logic.

And that formula is equivalent to

	(Target AND Condition) -> Effect

in classical logic.

Cheers,
-Polar

>