RE: [security-services] SAML extensions example

["Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>]

This would be a good plan since XTAML is now planned to become WS-TrustAxiom
which is built on the WS-TrustAssertionFramework and not the SAML framework.
There is no difference between the two except that WS-TrustFramework does
not define any application statements at all. This seems a better approach
in the light of what the XACML people did and the fact that folk who are
using XrML, Semantic Web etc are likely to want a more neutral statement
container than is provided by SAML.

This also works better in the case that SAML ends up converging with the
common framework at a later date. XTAML is not logically an extension of the
SAML application, but Liberty is.

Needless to say, at the time I was writing that stuff there was no liberty.

		Phill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:eve.maler@sun.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 3:51 PM
> To: 'security-services@lists.oasis-open.org'
> Subject: [security-services] SAML extensions example
> 
> 
> In Section 6 of the core spec, [XTAML] is given as an example of 
> something that extends SAML assertions.  The only version of 
> XTAML that 
> I can find only is from late 2001, and if that's the most recent one 
> it's certain not to conform to the current form of SAML.  
> This suggests 
> that it's not really the best example.  An obvious candidate for an 
> updated example is Liberty.  Does anyone mind if I switch to 
> that?  Or 
> do you have other suggestions?  Thanks--
> 
> 	Eve
> -- 
> Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190
> Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 354 9441
> Web Technologies and Standards               eve.maler @ sun.com
>