Dmitry,
I agree with you on this point, in fact I'd like to extend the
debate. In Neethi the concept of "term" seems to be any node in the Policy
tree (using a different analogy), with PrimitiveAssertion being a "leafNode"
... thus, as you say, no more terms here, so it becomes a little confusing.
I'm not that averse to the use of the term "term" (!) but what Neethi
doesn't make clear is the concept of "Alternative". These are collections of
Primitives which correspond to a valid configuration as specified by the
Policy ... I've raised a JIRA issue to add to the API to try to make this
more obvious. However, the problem is made even more complex with the
addition of NestedAssertions ... but that's another story.
Regards,
Brian.
On 5/4/06, Dmitry Goldenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
Question on the addTerm method on PrimitiveAssertion. Why is this method
there? Isn't it the point of PrimitiveAssertion that you can *not* add to
it, i.e. it is not composite but finite?
It seems to me that "addTerm" is better suited to be on the
CompositeAssertion interface. Furthermore, should it not be called
"addAssertion", to be more in line with the spec? The spec never uses the
word "term." What is a term anyway?
Thanks for any insight.
- Dmitry
