← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →
RE: [security-services] Status of and recommendation on SAML vers ioninfo
> I had been advocating that the namespace URI (a) not be a "real" web > resource/filename, and (b) not contain version information. However, > common practice has overtaken me on both counts: The only reason the version number is in there at present is to avoid confusion as the schema changes. I have always expected that we would go for a versionless URI for the spec version. I see this as being equivalent to the type of processing that IANA does on an RFC just before issue, adding in the assigned names and numbers etc. http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/security/saml/1.0/saml-assertion.xsd http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/security/saml/1.0/saml-protocol.xsd This would be OK for me. Phill
← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →