RE: [security-services] A "final" proposal on status codes

["Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>]

I have fixed the recursion error, that was simply a mess up on my part.

The use of attributes/elements is a trickier problem, I think we really
should use attributes for exactly the same reason SOAP is using elements,
consistency with the overall coding style.

One issue that did occur to me is whether we should specify which sub codes
are permissible for which top level codes.


		Phill

Phillip Hallam-Baker FBCS C.Eng.
Principal Scientist
VeriSign Inc.
pbaker@verisign.com
781 245 6996 x227


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich Salz [mailto:rsalz@zolera.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:54 AM
> To: Scott Cantor
> Cc: 'Hallam-Baker, Phillip'; 'SAML'
> Subject: Re: [security-services] A "final" proposal on status codes
> 
> 
> I believe XMLP decided to use elements, not attributes, because SOAP 
> itself doesn't use many attributes, and it was decided to continue 
> eschewing them.  They decided to use nested elements because of the 
> clear semantics.  I am, of course, saying "they" because I was on the 
> losing side. :)
> 	/r$
> -- 
> Zolera Systems, http://www.zolera.com
> Information Integrity, XML Security
>

Phillip Hallam-Baker (E-mail).vcf