Re: [security-services] Recommendation: SAML elements should be fullyqualified

["Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com>]

I suspect that it wants to be in the current Section 1.1, but it isn't in 
there yet.  (In my proposed editorial reorg of the introductory material, 
this section gets reorganized to be earlier than the "core assertion" 
section entirely.)

         Eve

At 04:27 PM 11/1/01 -0500, Mishra, Prateek wrote:
>At various points we have discussed the notion that wherever
>SAML elements in a message, they should be fully qualified with using
>the SAML namespace. I guess another way of putting this is a recommendation
>to avoid use of SAML elements while making some assumption
>about the default namespace.
>
>Is this stated someplace in core-19? I can't find it but then maybe I
>havent looked in the right places for it.
>
>- prateek
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

--
Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com