Please expand this agreement and line of reasoning to include any impacted
output structures and request structures as well. Options are but a part of
the puzzle.
Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Salz [mailto:]
Sent: November 7, 2003 12:06 AM
To: Trevor Perrin
Cc:
Subject: RE: [dss] Core versus Extended Profile Handling
> For the core, I'm voting to keep it as-is. I.e. <Options> is a
> sequence of <xs:any>, and there's a bunch of core options that
> profiles can pick and choose from, or add their own
I agree.
> I was thinking a profile might just be some text that says "these 3
> core options are allowed, and this core option is mandatory, and this
> profile option is allowed".
Exactly.
> If you wanted to translate that into a schema, you would translate the
> <Options> element as an <xs:all> of the option elements. In other
> words, there would be no ordering constraints on the options (in fact,
> we should
> *insist* that profiles not add ordering constraints).
I hadn't thought about the implications of ordering, but I agree with you
here, too.
/r$
--
Rich Salz Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
XML Security Overview http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the
OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dss/members/leave_workgroup.php
.
