I. Roll Call & Administration
Attendees
Daniel Engovatov
Hal Lockhart (Co-chair)
Michiharu Kudo
Anthony Nadalin
Argyn Kuketayev
Abbie Barbir
Kamalendu Biswas
Erik Rissanen
Bill Parducci (Co-chair, minutes)
Anne Anderson
David Staggs
Quorum was achieved (76% per Kavi)
Vote on Minutes
No discussion, issues with posted minutes.
VOTE: Approve minutes from September 28, 2006 meeting
Approved unanimously.
II. Postings and Proposal Review
Document Conventions
Anne reviewed her work with Erik and Oasis to distill a set of
practical guidelines for the TC.
Delegation Draft 14
Erik reviewed the changes in Draft. Delegation now uses Attribute
Categories. This has simplified the specification considerably. The
examples need to be updated once the disjunctive matching issue has
been resolved in the Attribute Category proposal.
Daniel discussed options on how to address matching and solicited
feedback from the TC.
Erik asked why you cannot have a condition at the Policy[Set] level.
The original thinking was that the conditions should be contained at
the Rule level. Raising Conditions to the Policy level potentially
introduces significant complexity to the matching process.
Erik raised the question on the list of Where we should put
PolicyIssuer and MultipleCondition. The general consensus is that this
should reside in the core specification.
The question of whether to remove the use of URNs in the
specification (vs. HTTP URI references) was raised on list. URNs were
originally chosen to call out the non-dereferenceable nature of the
information. The general consensus is that this not be changed.
SubjectCategory elements no longer exists and this information is
mapped to AttributeCategory.
III. Issues
#47 - WS-Policy Assertion Formats for XACML
Anne reviewed her proposal for WS-Policy Assertions, then answered a
few questions. However TC members need more time to study the draft
more thoroughly before discussing it in detail.
IV. Administrative
Oasis RF Terms
In the event "In case the TC is unable to finish its work by April,
Hal will post a ballot asking if members would be willing to
transition to the "RF on Limited Terms" IPR option. Members should
check with their company's legal and standards departments to see if
they should vote yes to such a transition.
meeting adjourned.