> Yes, I could not find anything in the conformance doc also.
It's missing. The intent was that type 0x04 is MTI.
> So, I could define
> Artifact = [Typecode MyFooBar(nn)]
> Where TypeCode := 0x0100 (e..g)
No. All SAML 2.0 artifacts have an index field. The part after the index is
open.
Furthermore, there isn't a formal registry of artifact type codes, which
means there is no guarantee you won't step on somebody else.
Finally, it's just generally a bad thing IMHO. What does your artifact do
that requires its own type?
-- Scott
