> From the current spec it looks as though the XACML Resource is
> different then the WS-Resource.
I assume you're talking about the Resource section of an XACML
Request. Yes, you're correct, these are completely different things.
> Is there any plans to merge these?
No. The Resource section of a Request is, just like the Subject,
Action, and Environment sections, an abstract representation of
attributes. It is designed to act exactly like the other three
sections, so it would make no sense to change just one section (since
it would break the general model). Of course, there's no reason you
couldn't transform the data in a WS-Resource, or define a new
datatype to include the WS-R in the XACML Request.
Is there a particular application you're thinking about here? Would
you like to make the case for merging? :)
seth
ps Just as it doesn't make sense (in my opinion) to adopt WS-R in
XACML, I also don't think it makes sense to go the other way around.
I'm no WS-R expert, but it seems to me that it is trying to provide
very specific things that XACML intentionally doesn't define. They're
certainly translatable (in both directions), and in fact it might
make sense to define a standard profile for how this works, but I
just don't think they make sense in the other domain..
