[jsdl-wg] ws-policy specification

[Andreas Savva]

One possibility, perhaps an ugly one, is to define Optional so that it 
can only take one value: 'true'. Then it can appear only if an extension 
is optional.

A.S.McGough wrote:
> That structure of Optional="true" would seem to work for backwards 
> compatibility. Though it would break the statement that in all JSDL 
> documents there are no defaults. As we'd have to say if Optional is not 
> defined then Optional="false". Otherwise the "there are no defaults in 
> JSDL" would allow people to say if its not defined then I can do what I 
> want - which will probably be to ignore it!
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> steve..
> 
> Fabio Benedetti wrote:
>> Following up today discussion on the call about the specification of
>> optional or mandatory extension to JSDL,
>> following is the link to the WS-Policy specification
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-ws-policy-20061117/
>>
>> In section 4.3.1 is described how domain specific policy assertions can
>> specify if they are optional or mandatory
>>
>> Ciao, Fabio
>>
>> Fabio Benedetti
>> STSM SWG/Tivoli Job Scheduling Development
>> Via Sciangai, 53 00144 Rome
>> Phone: +39 06596 62433 Fax: +39 06596 62077
>> eMail: fabio.benedetti at it.ibm.com
>>
>> --
>>   jsdl-wg mailing list
>>   jsdl-wg at ogf.org
>>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/jsdl-wg
>>   
> 
>