[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [security-services] Metadata errata items
> Other metadata elements are similarly confusing. For example, the > normative language surrounding <md:AttributeProfile> is exactly the > same as <md:NameIDFormat>. Likewise, the intended use of > <saml:Attribute> is unclear. If we're going to clarify one, we should > clarify them all. Fair enough. They're all equally clear to me; I suggested the errata because they don't seem to be clear to others. The intended use should be self-evident, I don't know what to do about that. > In contrast, the <md:RequestedAttribute> is very useful. The addition > of the isRequired attribute permits <md:RequestedAttribute> to be used > unequivocally. In contrast? I don't see a difference. I would say the enclosing elements there would be another case to clarify. > Or clarified in a separate metadata profile? Why should a metadata profile change the meaning of not including something? That should universally mean the same thing everywhere; if it's not there, it's not being communicated with this vehicle. -- Scott
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]