Polar,
did we agree that we want ordered 'or' etc only?
I think discussoins at f2f indicated that unordered 'or' etc must be
supported.
Why do we need on-error functions?
Simon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Polar Humenn" <pol...@syr.edu>
To: "XACML" <xac...@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 12:25 PM
Subject: [xacml] Functions Document again.
"and", "or" and "n-of" now hwave the semantics of their "ordered-*"
counter parts, and the "order-*" names have been removed.
Two new functions for catching the ERROR condition.
type-on-error
type-sequence-on-error
Each of which take two arguments, of which the second argument is a
"default" value for the expression should evaluating the first argument
result in ERROR.
We still need specifications for all the matching and equals functions!
Cheers,
-Polar
3 messages in org.oasis-open.lists.xacmlRe: [xacml] Functions Document again.
.bin