Re: [security-services] From commitee draft to committee specification

[Greg Whitehead <grw@trustgenix.com>]

I'm in favor of moving the SAML 1.1 Metadata CD to CS status. In as 
much as this is a normative document, and one that we would like to see 
support for in the marketplace, I think it is appropriate to move it 
forward.

I don't know if attestations are required to advance to CS, but I can 
attest that Trustgenix has successfully implemented the current 
specification (and we interop tested our implementation at Catalyst 
this week).

-Greg

On Jul 15, 2005, at 2:12 PM, prateek mishra wrote:

> In the previous conference call, there was interest expressed in 
> moving the saml 1.1 meta-data CD (and perhaps other drafts as well) to 
> committee specification. This would involve a 60 day public review 
> followed by an additional vote for committee specification. This 
> process is fully described at:
>  
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#stand_approv_process
>  
> Under previous rules, such as those followed for SAML 1.X 
> specifications and additional CDs (e.g. technical overview), there was 
> no such entity as a committee specification.
>  
> The purpose of this e-mail is to initiate a discussion on this topic 
> so that TC members are aware of of these changes as well as member 
> interest in creating committee specifications.