[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: References
Well, I'm looking over the ballot comments on references, and I have to say that I'm a little disappointed. I really think that there is a strong requirement for some kind of abbreviated form of "assertion handle" -- a way to get a full assertion from a small bit of data. XML is wordy, and we need small data for browser bindings. This is a non-obvious requirement for SAML that flows out of the use cases in our doc. I think it should be in there. Fortunately, since we didn't get consensus, R-Reference stays in, unclear as it may be. I was especially a little bummed at ballot comments that said, in response to the ballot issue to further define references, "'Reference' is undefined." Yeah, that's why we're trying to define it! ~ESP
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC