On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Ok, I just checked with Dave Booz from the policy spec team and the
> intention is the following:
>
> - the attachTo and appliesTo processing are independent
> - it is binding implementations or implementation type implementations
> that act on attached policysets after attachTo and appliesTo have been
> resolved
> - the appliesTo XPath expression can point to elements other than
> bindings or implementation elements in which case you look to the
> child elements to find a binding or implementation element
>
> So, from POL_4005
>
>   <policySet name="Qual1PolicySet"
> provides="test:testImplIntent.qual1" appliesTo="//service"
>              
> attachTo="//sca:component[@name='TEST_POL_4005Component1']/sca:service[@name='Service1']">
>      <!-- This policy intentionally left blank -->
>   </policySet>
>
> This policySet appliesTo all of the bindings of all of the services in
> the composite.
>
> - you could configure a policy set so that it applies to
> implementations and bindings, e.g. set appliesTo to point to a
> component, but this is likely to lead to errors as policy sets will
> normally be specific to an implementation or a binding. Having said
> that in Tuscany the runtime can still treats policy sets somewhat
> independently to add generic interceptors to wires so we may still
> want to maintain this ability as an extension to the specs
>
> So in short we do need to rework the appliesTo processing.
>

I've reworked things based on this clarification and committed it in
rev 1138105. This is causing three new compliance test failures, but I
think in all three cases the issue is in the test suite.

In POL_4003, "ExtPolicySet" only applies to binding.sca, but the
reference where the intent is specified will use binding.ws.

In POL_4024, "PolicySet1" only applies to binding.ws, but the
reference will use binding.sca.

POL_4020 also fails because the appliesTo is not specifying the
namespace for binding.sca. This is actually a pretty pervasive problem
across many of the policy tests, but seems to only affect this test.

Brent

Reply via email to