[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [saml-dev] the <md:ContactPerson> element
> - If the contact is a real person, then <md:ContactPerson> works just > fine. But what if the contact is a non-person (such as an e-mail > list)? Was there ever any discussion of non-person contacts while the > metadata spec was being developed by the TC? No, but I don't see there's a major problem with that. One of the name elements is probably unused, but it's not really a big deal. The best use of contact information is to put it in front of technical humans anyway. > Various federation metadata files I've looked at shoehorn non-persons > into <md:ContactPerson> in their own unique way. Thus > <md:ContactPerson> turns out to be fairly useless as a standard way to > represent contact information. That depends what you're doing with it, but how many unique ways are there? There's SurName and GivenName. What else could you do? > - Why is the type of <md:EmailAddress> specified to be anyURI (instead > of an ordinary string)? I'll note that some federations use mailto: > URIs to represent e-mail addresses and some don't, but both seem to > validate okay. Just a bad idea that didn't get flagged I think. > - Why is the type of <md:ContactPerson> called md:ContactType (instead > of md:ContactPersonType)? This inconsistent naming suggests the intent > to reuse the type in some way. Not every inconsistency gets caught. Virtually nobody reviewed the metadata spec at the time that I recall. I'm sure if we had been doing it from scratch, somebody would have suggested using vcard or whatever. -- Scott
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]