Congress’s policy language was designed to balance the needs of the people who write complex policies (e.g. encoding the relevant fragments of HIPAA) and the needs of the software that enforces that policy. Too rich a policy language and the software cannot properly enforce it; too poor and people cannot write the policy they care about.
Because the policy language is less expressive than a traditional programming languages, there will undoubtedly arise situations where we need to hit Congress with a hammer. There are several ways to do that.
If the cloud and policy are such that all potential violations can be prevented before they occur, the Access Control policy approach is the right one, and the policy described in Policy (called the Classification policy) is unnecessary because it will never be violated. But if there is ever a time at which some fragment of the policy might be violated, the Action-description approach is superior. Instead of writing two separate policies (the Classification policy and the Access Control policy) that have similar contents, we write two separate policies that have almost entirely independent contents (the Classification policy and the Action policy).
<Action description language>
<inserting action description policy into Congress>