security-services message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [security-services] Why use name-value pairs for modeling attributes?
- From: "Mishra, Prateek" <pmishra@netegrity.com>
- To: "'security-services@lists.oasis-open.org'"<security-services@lists.oasis-open.org>,"'saml-dev@lists.oasis-open.org'" <saml-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 18:06:06 -0400
Title: Credentials collection proposal
Sometime ago
(Aug 26), Joseph Reagle had asked me the question (the text is
mine):
----- Why do
SAML attribute statements include an AttributeType which models
the
----
relationship between an namespace-qualified attribute name and XML value as a
triple?
---- Why not
express this information as an XML fragment? The latter is the more standard
------ treatment anyway.
In other
words, instead of:
<Attribute>
<AttributeValue>Good</AttributeValue>
</Attribute>
use:
I recall
considerable discussion around this topic around F2F#3 (BTW, are the minutes
still available someplace in the Oasis web site?). My recollection is that
we chose this treatment primarily to unify the syntax of attributes
and attribute queries. This was based on a consensus to avoid use of a
general XML query language.
The corresponding attribute query has the
form:
<AttributeQuery>
</AttributeQuery>
which has
fairly obvious syntax and semantics.
Maybe other
SAML-ers other aspects of this discussion. Retrieving the minutes would
also be helpful.
- prateek
mishra
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC