RE: [security-services] A possibly contentious submission

[Hal Lockhart <hlockhar@bea.com>]

Good paper. The main thing missing is any mention of the conditions/advice
semantics which was supposed to function similiarly to the SOAP
mustUnderstand.

Hal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Cantor [mailto:cantor.2@osu.edu]
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 3:12 PM
> To: SAML
> Subject: [security-services] A possibly contentious submission
>
>
> Well, I promised to start an argument, so here goes. I've been
> going around on a lot this stuff with various people in the Liberty
> Alliance, so I'm fairly certain I'm in a small minority, but FWIW.
>
> The last section sums up my viewpoint on what's wrong with the
> versioning approaches that I think are typical right now, and lays
> out my particular thinking. The disconnect at least helps me
> understand why I'm confused, so even if you all throw this out in
> disgust, it wasn't wasted (or even a lot of) effort on my part.
>
> The gist is that I think we're headed down the wrong road if we
> change namespaces every time we release a spec, and I can't really
> tell if that's what people think we should do or not.
>
> WRT the XML signature issues, the irony is that I believe we
> can't make the changes we need to make to add ID attributes and still
> call this a minor revision, unfortunately. Perhaps the upside is
> that if what people think is minor is way beyond my definition, we
> probably can.
>
> -- Scott
>


----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>