Re: [security-services] New Schedule for SAML 2.0 Standardization

[Anthony Nadalin <drsecure@us.ibm.com>]

>We've actively discussed the details of the schedule since at least the F2F in Austin back in March.  It's unnecessary to hold interop testing prior to publication of a Committee Draft,
>but if you thought it was imperative, you should have brought it up well in advance (e.g., at the March meeting you yourself hosted).

Eve, please tell me why its unnecessary to hold an interop event as its unnecessary to have a lot of things (like conformance suite) but the TC does? I don't see an interop on schedule or in any discussions. Providing interoperability should be a core aspect of every OASIS standard (as this is why we do stds). I for one have no idea about the implementation or interoperability issues (or non issues) until an interop is done, so its hard to vote to take what we have to CD. I think that with all the changes in SAML 2.0 that an interop is perfectly appropriate.

Are you also saying that I can't bring this issue up now as time has passed ?

Anthony Nadalin | work 512.838.0085 | cell 512.289.4122