At 12:55 PM 8/22/2003, Pete - Madscientist wrote:
|-----Original Message-----
|From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On
|Behalf Of Yakov Shafranovich
<snip>
|>Currently the way the XML-CPDL example works is to define scope in
|>terms of a SYSTEM. A SYSTEM might be a user, organization, etc...
<snip>
|Would any of this be relevant to the consent framework? Do we need to
|define further what SCOPE is and how it works within the
|consent framework,
|or should that be something that is left for the language?
That is a good question.
The XML-CPDL is _somewhat_ agnostic on the application of SCOPE, but
fairly definite on it's implementation. I think at the very least we
should be sure that SCOPE as defined in the consent framework is not
incompatible with the XML-CPDL. We should probably endeavor to make a
direct linkage between the two - and where that is not possible explain
how the two interact.
The languages and protocols for consent should flow out from the consent
framework. This is consistent with the approach taken by the IM WG in the IETF.
Yakov
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg