Re: [xacml] xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-02-en.doc Spec Review

Kim,

Should the "Previous Version" be the latest working draft, latest 
committee draft or latest Oasis standard? I cannot find any guideline 
for this, so I assumed that is the latest Oasis standard since most 
people would not think of that the previous version before XACML 3.0 is 
"XACML 3.0 working draft 15", rather the would think that the previous 
version is 2.0.

In either case, you said in your review that there was no problems in 
xacml-3.0-core-spec-cd-02-en.doc, which lists XACML 2.0 as the previous 
version.

So, either:

1. "Previous version" should be the previous working/committee draft 
version, in which case all documents are wrong (since they say 2.0)

2. "Previous version" should be the latest Oasis standard, in which case 
all documents are ok (since there was no previous Oasis standard of  
xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-02-en.doc, so it should be N/A)

Best regards,
Erik

On 2010-02-24 15:01, Kim Goolsby wrote:
> 1. Previous Version:
>  Should read as follows:
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/xacml/3.0/xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-1-en.html 
>
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/xacml/3.0/xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-1-en.doc 
> (Authoritative)
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/xacml/3.0/xacml-3.0-administration-v1-spec-cd-1-en.pdf 
>
>
> 2. Related Work: Should include URI [this change is optional]
>
> 3. Remove 'Latest Approved Version:'