On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> Did I miss the justification for re-inventing another xml flavor of
> the ASN.1 Attribute rather than re-using someone else's (e.g. DSML)?
> Seems like we're re-visiting a lot that others must have considered.
As Scott said, SAML Attributes and values need not be restricted to those
supported in LDAP/X.500 or definable in ASN.1; in fact I think it's one of
the points of SAML being XML-oriented to not be so limited. However, I'm
sure it's the case that many deployments will want to map directly from
X.500-defined attributes and values to SAML ones (we've talked about this
quite a bit in Shib), so it would most likely be a useful thing for
someone to describe a way of doing this, and this would almost certainly
be based on DSML. But I wouldn't hold up the 1.0 spec waiting on this.
- RL "Bob"
