Spec issue #11: ReferenceDefinition CanReferTo without targetID.

[Gary P Cole <Gary.P.Cole@Sun.COM>]

11. What if a reference definition does not specify a targetID on the 
canReferTo schema entity?

In the spec's listTargets example, the listTargetsResponse contains two 
targets.
Within target2’s declaration of the Reference Capability for Person, the 
provider declares that a Person on target2 may own an account on 
target1. (That is, an instance of Person on target2 may use an "owns" 
type of reference to refer to an instance of Account on target1.)

<listTargetsResponse status=“success">
...
<target targetID=“target2”>
...
<capabilities>
...
<capability identifier=”urn:oasis:names:tc:SPML:2.0:reference”>
<appliesTo entityName=”Person”/>
<referenceDefinition typeOfReference=”owns”/>
<schemaEntity entityName=”Person”/>
<canReferTo entityName=”Account” targetID=“target1”/>
</referenceDefinition>
</capability>
</capabilities>
</target>
</listTargetsResponse>

SchemaEntityRefType doesn't yet contain a "targetID" element or 
attribute, but it's supposed to. (That's XSD issue #65). It's been 
proposed that targetID be optional in this context, but my opinion is 
that it should be required.

In the listTargetsResponse example above, what would it mean if the 
provider omitted the targetID attribute of <canReferTo>? Would this be 
an error (since target2 does not support Account), or would this mean 
that an instance of Person on target2 may use the “owns” type of 
reference refer to an instance of Account on any target?