I have started an Errata list seeded with comments received too late to go into Revision 1. This is attached. - Is anyone else on the TC willing to maintain this list? I maintained the issues list prior to public review and the comments list during public review. It doesn't seem quite fair for one person to hog all this power and prestige :-) (Also, I would like a break.) - Do we want to discuss errata comments at the Monday meetings? - Do we want to have Monday meetings at all (until needed)? - If so, do we want to meet Dec. 23 or 30? (holiday period for many members) - Is the TC planning to meet December 26? (holiday period for many members) 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 XACML Committee Specification 1.0 (Revision 1), 12 December 2002 Title: Errata List Version: 1.1, 02/12/13 (yymmdd) Errata are in order according to location in the document. Each erratum has a STATUS indicating whether it has been approved by the XACML TC. =================================================================== A.2 Primitive types Add something to mention the extensibility of the data type system. Submitted by: Daniel Engovatov <
dengovatov@crosslogix.com> Date: 11 Dec 2002 STATUS: Not yet discussed. ------------------------------------------------------------- ALTERNATIVE: Already described in "8.1 Extensible XML attribute types" Submitted by: Anne Anderson <
Anne.Anderson@Sun.com> Date: 13 Dec 2002 STATUS: Not yet discussed. =================================================================== A.3 Structured types, pdf:3408 In the first item of Appendix A.3, 1) Replace "xsi:string" by the correct URI. 2) Replace "XMLSchema-Instance#string" by "XMLSchema#string" Submitted by: Satoshi Hada <
SATOSHIH@jp.ibm.com> Date: 11 Dec 2002 STATUS: Not yet discussed. ========================================================================= A.6 Expressions, pdf:3458-3461 Section A.6 states that all expressions listed below evaluate to either a primitive type, or a bag of primitive types. This needs to be enhanced because of the <Function> argument, and also it states nothing of extension types. I suggest the following wording: Change the first paragraph to: XACML specifies expressions in terms of the following elements of which the <Apply> and <Condition> elements recursively compose greater expressions. Valid expressions shall be type correct, which means that the types of each of the elements contained within <Apply> and <Condition> elements shall agree with the respective argument types of the function that is named by the FunctionId attribute. The resultant type of the <Apply> or <Condition> element shall be the resultant type of the function, which may be narrowed to a primitive data type or a bag of a primitive data type by type unification. XACML defines an evaluation result of "Indeterminate", which is said to be the result of an invalid expression, or an operational error occurring during the evaluation of the expression. Submitted by: Polar Humenn <
polar@syr.edu> Date: 11 Dec 2002 STATUS: Not yet discussed. ========================================================================== 2.1 Requirements, pdf:357-358 When I read the line #[357-358], I got the impression that this is about creating policy sets, but this is about combining rules and policies to evaluate authZ decision. I think changing the term "action" to "access request" makes it clear. At the same time, the objective of combining rules and policies is to evaluate the consolidated authorization decision and not to create a policy set(?). I would say statement like "To provide a method for combining individual rules and policies to evaluate authZ decision that applies to a given access request" is more clear. Lines #[403-405 2.3 Combining algorithms] indicate the same. Submitted by: "Chopra, Dipak" <
dipak.chopra@sap.com> Date: 11 Dec 2002 STATUS: Not yet discussed. ========================================================================= Submitted by: Date: STATUS: Not yet discussed. =========================================================================