OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

security-services message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Editorial fix to -core re: <StatusCode> and Value attribute references

We're not consistent in the way we refer to "StatusCode" and "StatusCode Value" in the text. In the V1.0 -core spec:


o        line 1089 says " ...top-level StatusCode value of Responder and a second-level code value".  "code" should be made more consistent. (no bolding or quoting of StatusCode or Responder)

o        Line 1090 uses "ResourceNotRecognized" (no bolding or quoting)

o        Line 1218 refers to the "<StatusCode> element"

o        Line 1226 uses "StatusCode Value" where StatusCode is bolded and Value is not.

o        Line 1260 uses "StatusCode element's Value attribute" (no bolding)

o        Line 1262 uses "<StatusCode> element and its StatusCodeType complex type" where "StatusCodeType" is bolded

o        Line 1301 uses "a <samlp:StatusCode> with value 'Success'" (where Success is quoted)

o        Line 1344 uses "StatusCode value of VersionMismatch" (no bolding)


I didn't check -bindings, but I'd suspect there may be similar problems there.


We should use a consistent formatting and reference style when referring to the element <StatusCode> and the QNames associated with the Value attribute.


Rob Philpott
RSA Security Inc.
The Most Trusted Name in e-Security
Tel: 781-515-7115
Mobile: 617-510-0893
Fax: 781-515-7020


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]