[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [saml-dev] Attribute equality during AttributeQuery
On 8/28/14, 5:54 PM, "Peter Major" <peter.major@forgerock.com> wrote: >Will there be a 2.1/new version of the spec? The person that was volunteering to work on 2.1 is no longer in a position to do so. I made it very clear that I can't do it. I wrote a dozen post-2.0 specs that were completely ignored. There's nothing in it for my project to pay me to do that work. When we need extensions, we can implement them ourselves, and so far we'd be the only ones implementing them whether I wrote them up or not. If there's some sign of that changing, then it's possible my conclusion on that would change. But this particular issue isn't a blind spot, it's a deliberate choice to make the standard more complex and difficult to make sense of to accomodate bad implementation choices by vendors. That's another reason I won't do it again; I fought against these mistakes already and lost. Your other example of the artifact binding is not really a blind spot, it's just a feature that isn't terribly useful but falls out of symmetry and is fully defined if somebody chose to implement it. Shibboleth SPs can issue requests by artifact, but we never bothered to implement it in the IdP to date. IMHO, what's needed more than a 2.1 are a willingness by implementers to do more than the checklist minimum, and an implementer's guide. The latter has been needed all along, but is just a case of me not being willing to spend my free time doing it. -- Scott
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]