[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [security-services] Potential Erratum -- NameIDMappingResponse schema
> "(gg) "Substantive Change" is a change to a specification that would require > a compliant application or implementation to be modified or rewritten in > order to remain compliant." Yeah, I just checked it. > I'm not sure that the modification of schema as suggested would "require" > compliant implementations to change. Indeed, I'm pretty sure none of the > implementations that have passed through the testing program enforce schema > validation, and no one has complained about this particular issue. Possibly true. But you could argue that if the errata is addressing a part of the spec where conformant behavior was essentially impossible to determine, that any change made would by definition be a change. Regardless, I think the definition is broken. Conformance criteria should reference errata if you're going to make errata serve its full purpose. -- Scott
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]