[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [security-services] work product review
Mary McRae wrote on 2009-10-27: > I don't think most TCs do this, but that's fine - although it > needs to reference the specific version of the spec it's associated > with (not the filename, but the reference). I'll just label the reference then. > On the other hand, no schema was previously identified; nor was it > included in the public review notice; nor does it live at the location > you've identified. Would the addition of a normative schema not be a > substantive change? Then there was an oversight, because I uploaded a fresh copy of the schema along with the documents. I do this for every transition stage, even if the scheme hasn't changed, so that Kavi will display them together. You'll see it grouped with both CD-01 (the public-reviewed version) and CD-02. I have no idea what was or wasn't in the review notice. The schema is inside the document as well as in its own file, like all the SAML documents have done. The rules changed and the schema file can be the normative one now. -- Scott
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]