Minor comments/questions on W28a-attribute-draft-03-diff

Line 126: urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:valuetype-format:appSpecific

-         
In other definitions, we use "urn:...:unspecified"
to refer to undefined or application-specific uses.  Why aren't we
using "unspecified" rather than "appSpecific"?

 

Line 128: "in order
for an attribute to be returned" -> "in order
for an attribute value to be returned"

 

Lines 161, 166, etc: Can we change "att-format"
to "attributename-format" or "attrname-format"?  "att"
seems too ambiguous.

 

Rob Philpott

Senior Consulting Engineer 

RSA Security Inc. 

Tel: 781-515-7115 

Mobile: 617-510-0893 

Fax: 781-515-7020 

mailto: