RE: [xacml] Section B.6 - Resource attributes

>I think Daniel also objected to forcing resource-id to be a URI.
>Or maybe it was just a URI conforming to my proposed hierarchical
>URI scheme :-)

Yes, I do believe that an identifier should not be any more specific
then a string.   Existing systems already have a naming convention in
place and imposing a new naming convention on them serves no purpose,
just forces backward and forward conversion on all system edges (not
just authoring, but queries, policy analysis, etc.) - that being a major
PITA.

>So is there a reason resource-id must be a URI?

If one wants to use one of the optional schemas of representing
hierarchical relationship between resources, I guess.  Though, you know
I would recommend using (notional) "resource-ancestors" representation
that accommodates any hierarchical naming schema (including URI)
completely.


Daniel;