I'd be happy to start a "corrigendum" document...just don't ask me to say it
:-)
Jahan
------------------------------
Jahan Moreh
Chief Security Architect
310.288.2141
-----Original Message-----
From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 1:25 PM
To: ''
Subject: [security-services] EDITORIAL: status of all drafts (long)
I believe the following editorial actions are currently outstanding. If
you're an editor of *anything* in the SAML set, read on!
Website:
- Are we starting to make our drafts publicly available again?
If so, I will start updating the web page again as of next
Tuesday. Otherwise, I'll wait until we go to Committee Draft.
All OOo documents:
- There are a number of copyediting/cleanup items I will do
to all drafts once we're satisfied with the content. I suggest
that our Committee Draft vote(s) be on the "Working Draft"-stage
docs and that I be instructed to prepare the drafts for publication
as "Committee Drafts", which will include only *non*-substantive
changes. If you're curious as to the list of items I will address,
let me know.
Conformance:
- Copyedited; awaiting more discussion and substantive updating.
- Note that it now serves as an entry point for the entire spec
set. If you're an editor and want a handy reference to
bibliographic entries for everything in SAML V2.0, this is the
place to look!
Glossary:
- I took an action to incorporate some edits in Jeff's stead; will
do that before Tuesday. I will also copyedit prior to the
final OOo copyedits.
Core, assertions schema, protocol schema:
- Scott has incorporated the latest substantive edits; awaiting
more discussion and substantive updating. Before next Tuesday,
I will try to do some core-specific cleanup edits.
Bindings:
- Scott has incorporated the latest substantive edits; awaiting
more discussion and substantive updating.
- I'm not planning to do anything here until Ctte Draft stage.
Profiles and ECP schema:
- Scott has incorporated the latest substantive edits; awaiting
more discussion and substantive updating. Before next Tuesday,
I will try to do some "developmental" editing.
Attribute profile schemas:
- Scott needs to break these out and upload them.
Metadata and schema:
- Scott has incorporated the latest substantive edits; awaiting
more discussion and substantive updating.
- I'm not planning to do anything here until Ctte Draft stage.
Security/Privacy Considerations:
- This has been stable for a little while.
- I'm not planning to do anything here until Ctte Draft stage.
Authn Context and schemas:
- John K needs to check on the element for the authenticating
authority.
- John K needs to upload all the missing context class schemas.
- I'm not planning to do anything here until Ctte Draft stage.
Tech Overview:
- In John H's stead, I promised to work on this. I probably
won't get to it till next week, but I want to incorporate
Paul M's comments.
- I also need to complete/update the listing of differences
between SAML V1.1 and SAML V2.0 that's in there now.
- Tim Alsop is scheduled to provide some Kerb-specific content
at some point.
- John H will return in a week or so.
Migration Paths:
- Is Scott still planning to work on this document?
Executive Overview:
- What's the status?
Implementation Guidelines:
- Charles has done some work on this.
What I've been telling the editors is that we should try to have the
non-normative, non-Standards-track documents in at least an *early*
draft form by the time we publish the Committee Drafts; this is to give
developers and other spec users a fighting chance of understanding
everything. We don't need to have finished versions, I believe, until
we publish the final OASIS Standard, but we should turn our attention to
them full-time once the Committee Drafts are out for review.
I had a conversation with Eduardo Gutentag about "errata" and
"corrigenda", and have some suggestions:
- We should start a document (Jahan's name is on this task),
once we publish the Ctte Drafts, to hold a catalog of all potential
and actual changes to the drafts on their way to OASIS Standard, just
as we did for V1.1. However, I believe we should *not* call it
"Errata", as this has been confusing in the past. The reason to
have it is to give guidance to developers who begin implementing
on the occasion of Ctte Draft publication. "SAML V2.0 Committee
Draft Change Catalog" would probably do...
- OASIS has good reasons for not having a lightweight true-errata
process subsequent to OASIS Standard publication; interop and
conformance get very confusing. However, we are not prevented
from publishing what Eduardo calls "corrigenda"*, by which he means
the TC's *opinion* about how to interpret ambiguous parts and fix
conflicting and boneheaded parts, with a published intention to
change the next release of SAML to match. As long as we don't
totally contradict our own specs, this should work fine.
Eve
*According to Merriam-Webster Online, "erratum" is an error;
"corrigendum" a published error with its correction; and "errata"
(confusingly) is a set of corrigenda (very confusing). This latter
usage seems technically incorrect according to the Latin, but it's in
common usage. Eduardo was using "errata" to refer to normative,
approved-by-OASIS corrections, and "corrigenda" to refer to
non-normative, approved-only-by-the-TC corrections. I think it's safest
if we stay the heck away from all these terms, if we can. :-)
--
Eve Maler +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems cell +1 781 354 9441
Web Products, Technologies, and Standards eve.maler @ sun.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the
OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/security-services/members/leave
_workgroup.php.
