[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [security-services] A "final" proposal on status codes
Please use the more common spelling: "Requester". This is the spelling used in the specs. At 10:12 AM 1/9/02 -0800, Simon Godik wrote: >Scott, > >This is good status code proposal. > >I think it is better to use samlp:Requestor and samlp:Responder in >samlp:StatusCodeEnumType definition rather >than samlp:Sender and samlp:Receiver. Also, we can also refer to 'saml >requestor' and 'saml responder' in the descriptive > >text. ... -- Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190 Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center eve.maler @ sun.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC