RE: [security-services] AI 0031 Clarify text around AuthorityKind

[Scott Cantor <cantor.2@osu.edu>]

> It's still highly unlikely for there to be symbol space ambiguity given 
> this setup, but still...  I'd rather go for a goal of "as few options as 
> possible, ideally one" (this was one of the original XML design 
> principles), and pick one or the other.  Since substituted elements have 
> to be of compatible types with the head of the substitution group, and 
> assuming this causes no problems with implementers, I'd go with types 
> instead of elements all around as soon as practicable (and get rid of 
> <RespondWith> :-).

I certainly agree that using types is sufficient, but could you clarify this ambiguity? How can somebody redefine what type
samlp:AttributeQuery is bound to?

All I see is two ways of accomplishing the same thing, but I don't quite see where there's a potential for ambiguity.

The reason I proposed text that introduced this problem is that the actual errata brought up was that the text *presumed* use of
xsi:type, but I guess that can be fixed by still requiring the type of the derived element to be used.

-- Scott


-- Scott