[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xacml] IPC profile proposed attribute list
How about this: Agreement-Type classification values shall be designated with the following attribute identifier: urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:3.0:ipc:resource:agreement-type The DataType of this attribute is http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string. This attribute data may contain multiple values. This attribute can be used to indicate whether or not a specific resource is governed by a particular license arrangement. The range of values of the attribute SHALL be “NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT”, “PROPRIETARY INFORMATION AGREEMENT”, “TECHNICAL DATA GRANT”, “COPYRIGHT GRANT”, “PATENT GRANT”, “TRADEMARK GRANT”, “CROSS LICENSING GRANT”, and/or “ROYALTY BEARING”. Affiliation-Type classification values shall be designated with the following attribute identifier: urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:3.0:ipc:subject:affiliation-type The DataType of this attribute is http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string. This attribute data may contain multiple values. The range of values of the attribute SHALL be “CUSTOMER”, “SUPPLIER”, “PARTNER”, “NON-PROFIT”, “GOVERNMENT”, “PRIMARY CONTRACTOR”, “SUBCONTRACTOR”, “JOINT DEVELOPMENT”, and/or “AUTHORIZED SUB-LICENSOR”. IP-Type and IP-Data will still be replaced by the Copyright/Patent/Proprietary/Public Domain/Trademark Booleans. We can discuss tomorrow. Thanks From: Tyson, Paul H [mailto:PTyson@bellhelicopter.textron.com] I don’t recall about favoring several Boolean-valued attributes over a single attribute with a defined range of string values. I checked the minutes and did not see anything there. I would prefer to see a defined range of string values for a single ‘agreement-type’ attribute. If an agreement fit into several categories there could be multiple values. Regards, --Paul From: xacml@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:xacml@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Tolbert, John W Upon further consideration, we decided the *-registration values aren’t needed, so I have removed them from the forthcoming WD-06. After the last TC call, I was under the impression that using Booleans for a constrained list was preferred over strings with defined values. I agreed to replace the former IP-Data string options with a series of Booleans. I decided to extend that method to agreement-type and affiliation-type as well, in the interest of consistency and in the hope that it would simplify policy authoring. From: David Brossard [mailto:david.brossard@axiomatics.com] Hi John, On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Tolbert, John W <john.w.tolbert@boeing.com> wrote: To reduce the number of string data-types, we've decided to expand the allowable strings for the "agreement-type" and "affiliation-type" attributes into separate Boolean attributes, as noted below. I plan on updating WD-06 with this new structure and more explanatory text.
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]