... if it's just an attribute that provides an explanation for a decision then I would not have a possibility to use an expression as attribute's value, assuming that by attribute you meant an XML attribute.
In my example I need more flexibility because explanation is an expression.
If you meant <Attribute> from the XACML spec then it should suffice, because it contains <AttributeValue> elements, which are expressions.
--- On Thu, 12/11/08, Bill Parducci <> wrote:
> From: Bill Parducci <>
> Subject: Re: [xacml-users] Help on Condition ? <-- Obligations
> To:
> Cc: "Seth Proctor" <>, , "Balaji Kannadassan" <>
> Date: Thursday, December 11, 2008, 2:11 PM
> There is a current proposal to create dynamic Obligations
> within V3. We are just working through a discussion re: if
> Obligations should handle the "decision advice"
> aspects or if we should have a specific attribute for
> indicating why decision was made.
>
> b
>
> On Dec 11, 2008, at 9:42 AM, Oleg Gryb wrote:
>
> > In regards specific requirements, please do consider
> adding expressions to obligations as I and other people had
> suggested in the past. It would make the obligations more
> dynamic. Example: I want to return an error message:
> "The access to the bill pay service has been denied
> because you exceeded the total maximum of $10000 in 6-month
> period" where $10000 and 6-month are environment
> attributes. I didn't find a way of creating such an
> obligation within current spec.
