> The problem (for me, at least) stems from the phrase "any artifact" in
> the opening line of the quote. Since artifacts of type 0x0001--0x0003
> do not have an EndpointIndex, they do not qualify as "any artifact" as
> defined in SAML2. So what is the "status" of these older artifact
> formats? (Surely, a SAML2 implementation can take advantage of them
> since indexed endpoints have defaults.)
No. SAML 1.x artifacts have no place in SAML 2.0 whatsoever. Different
semantics entirely.
> Then the original definition of SAML_artifact in SAML 1.1 is
> preserved.
That is not in any way shape or form a goal.
-- Scott
