Re: [saml-dev] Second Artifact in SAML Bindings doc

Scott, thanks!  -Takashi

(11/08/17 0:48), Cantor, Scott wrote:
> On 8/15/11 11:54 PM, "Takashi Shitamichi"<>
> wrote:
>> I have a question.
>>
>> At step 6, 7 and 8, a second Artifact is introduced in case of
>> unspecified interactions. I think those interactions of step 6-8 are
>> "optional" or can be changed/added with any other interactions. Is my
>> understanding correct? I believe they do not mean "MUST".
> The example is showing artifacts in both directions. 3.6.5, among other
> sections, discusses the nature of HTTP bindings and their composability.
> There is no MUST stated or implied in the example.
>
> -- Scott
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
>