Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [higgins-dev] Intent of Policy in Higgins 1.1
Title: Re: [higgins-dev] Intent of Policy in Higgins 1.1
Thanks. And yes, this kind of feedback is great. --Paul


On 4/16/09 6:39 PM, "David Kuehr-McLaren" <dkuehrmc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Paul,

Thanks.  

You have probably already corrected this one, as well, in 1.1.106 the label for "partof" is "part".  

David

PS.  I should ask you if you want these types of comments?

David Kuehr-McLaren
Tivoli Security
919.224.1960



Paul Trevithick <ptrevithick@xxxxxxxxx> 04/16/2009 05:46 PM

To

David Kuehr-McLaren/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS

cc

higgins-dev <higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Subject

Re: [higgins-dev] Intent of Policy in Higgins 1.1




David,

That was a bug. I’ve fixed it in (upcoming) 1.1.107. The RDF Label now reads “Policy”. The Policy class is the superclass of the “AccessControl” class.

--Paul


On 4/16/09 9:46 AM, "David Kuehr-McLaren" <dkuehrmc@xxxxxxxxxx <dkuehrmc@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:


Paul,

The RDF Label on the Policy object in the HOWL1-1-106.rdf file says the Policy object is an Access Control Policy.  Is that true (there is a subclass for access control), or is the Policy object a base object that can apply as the parent class to other policy types?

Thanks,

David

David Kuehr-McLaren
Tivoli Security
919.224.1960


Back to the top