RE: [saml-dev] RE: [x500standard] Re: SAML V2.0 X.500/LDAP Attribute Profile

["Scott Cantor" <cantor.2@osu.edu>]

> If something is actually unclear, errata can be written, but practically
> speaking, we're out of public review here (people just had 60 days to
> comment) and we just voted this to CS. It isn't coming back out again, at
> least not with me as editor right now.

BTW, in case my meaning there wasn't clear, I'm not against whatever you
want to change here, I'm just saying my interest in it is pretty well cooked
and would gladly hand it off to anybody that wants to do something more with
it.

My approach to attributes is a much more loosely defined set of guidelines:

- URI naming (don't care much what they are)
- don't use xsi:type
- process the AttributeValue as dictated by a definition for that URI

That pretty much meets my needs. Maybe there's a profile somewhere in that,
don't know.

I think SAML needs to simplify, so having complex rules around attributes is
counter to that goal. The rest of the world is busy using name/value pairs
in HTTP. We need to stick to that level of simplicity where we can or be
ignored.

-- Scott