MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
xacml message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xacml] xpath-expression datatype
From: Polar Humenn <>
To: Seth Proctor <>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:28:20 -0400 (EDT)
I appologize, I think I just glossed over the subject line. just saw
the word "expression", of which I thought you were referring to the base
type of all our expressions. Opps.!
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Seth Proctor wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 10:53, Polar Humenn wrote:
> > It is a "base type", and therefore you will not see it in anything.
>
> What? Because string, integer, or boolean is a basetype, do I also not
> see them in anything? No. I see them in functions. I see them in
> normative behavior. I see many justifications for why they exist in the
> specification.
>
> > > I think it will cause a great deal of confusion to have a datatype that
> > > goes unused.
> >
> > Why are you confused? The fact that every time you use a specific
> > construct, i.e. <Apply>, <AttributeValue>, etc. you are using
> > <ExpressionType>, just because you don't see it on paper? It is a function
> > of the compiler, not of the user.
>
> I think you should go back and read my original email again. I'm not
> talking about the Expression element. I'm fine with that. I'm talking
> about a new datatype called xpath-expression.
>
> > > In fact, we have three functions that use XPath
> > > expressions, but they define their parameters in terms of strings, which
> > > I think will further confuse people.
> >
> > Where did this come from? Now we are talking about the arguments to
> > expressions. XPath expressions are not in the type system of the XACML
> > language. They are an element of XPATH, and defined there. We can only
> > have them as strings, unless, you want to bring all of XPATH into XACML.
>
> Again, please re-read my previous email. I think you'll find that we're
> in agreement on this point.
>
>
> seth
>
