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: [no subject]

We should, however, first think about whether implementors would be
the audience for such a re-structuring. If not, then who would we
target with such (a) document(s)? In fact, if a goal of SSTC is to
"promote adoption of SAML" then I think one good way to encourage such
adoption is to provide support documents around the normative
specifications, that help place them in context, and explain what SAML
is good for, and why... 

Finally, one of the things that I think might be good for implementors
is if the SAML documents were available as HTML, and hyper-linked
appropriately. This would make it possible to easily link between
documents as a complete set (another method would be to use PDF
bookmarking in some tricky fashion). If one could easily link between
documents that way, it would be possible to make easy, clickable
reference to examples (possibly in another document) from the
normative text, and vice-versa. 

- JohnK


[SAMLCore]       Assertions and Protocol for the OASIS Security
Assertion Markup Language v1.1, Committee Specification, 27 May 2003

[SAMLBind]       Bindings and Profiles for the OASIS Security
Assertion Markup Language v1.1, Committee Specification, 27 May 2003</color><color><param>3231,3231,9B9A</param>


On Thursday, Aug 14, 2003, at 10:32 US/Eastern, Eve L. Maler wrote:

<excerpt>The editorial folks have been bouncing around a few ideas,
and I wanted to bring them to the whole TC for discussion.  (Should
these be added explicitly to the work items document?  That document
is feeling almost like an issues list now...)  Perhaps we could spend
a few minutes on each at the next meeting.

- Bindings/profiles spec reorganization.  We have talked before about
versioning implications of individual profiles.  I think it would be
more elegant, versioning-wise, to put the instructional material about
"what constitutes a profile" in the core spec, and then have
individual specs for each profile or set of related profiles.  If
we're going to be adding bindings, we might want to do the same thing
with them.  Another consideration is the breakdown of Liberty specs;
Jeff pointed out that we might want to follow that lead.  But he also
pointed out another consideration: speed of V2.0 vs. undertaking a
huge reorg.  We'll need to discuss the speed factor as part of our
goal statement discussion, methinks, and that will help to guide the
editorial choices.

- Ease-of-use content.  I've suggested that we desperately need
examples in the core spec, and others have suggested that we produce a
tutorial.  What do people think is the best way to deliver this sort
of stuff: an examples appendix, examples interspersed among the
normative bits, a separate tutorial with examples, all of the above,
...?  Are there materials out there that we could use as a basis?



Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190

Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 354 9441

Web Products, Technologies, and Standards    eve.maler @ sun.com


SunNetwork 2003 Conference and Pavilion  http://www.sun.com/sunnetwork

September 16-18, 2003                    Moscone Center, San Francisco

An unparalleled event in network computing! Make the net work for you!

You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting


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