| Question asked
|
Conditions in the Eagle policy specificati … Conditions in the Eagle policy specification language are said to be "described as a conjunction of expressions." Is there a reason why disjunction are not allowed? Disjunction could be emulated by simply producing new conditions, but this runs the risk of over burdening the person charged with maintaining the policies. Wouldn't many real-world conditions involve disjunctions, making it a desirable feature?
Why does section 4 restrict the use of variables to just the subject and object of an RDF triple pattern? Are there policies that would benefit from the ability to match on the semantic relationships between individuals, not just the individuals themselves?
Is there any provision in the system to support graph pattern matching against multiple discrete events? Could this be handled by a general PE?
The evaluation uses what seems like a rather complex setup of randomly generated PEs and RDF graphs with no real discussion of how this might simulate data used in real policies. Is this expected to have any relationship to real-world policies? e any relationship to real-world policies?
|
