Re: [security-services] editorial comments on bindings-08

["Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com>]

At 02:37 PM 1/8/02 -0500, Mishra, Prateek wrote:
>1. "SOAP Profile for SAML" vs. "SOAP Profile of SAML"
>
>Do folks have a preference? Different versions have ping-ponged between the
>two phrases.

I don't care.  When I did editorial stuff on the bindings doc, I just 
picked the first one that occurred and tried to standardize on it.  I may 
have missed some (but I did check back with the bindings doc when working 
on references to profiles in other specs!).

>2. Section 2.1 mandates the provision of a URI and e-mail address for each
>binding and
>profile. This is currently missing in the text and needs to be added to the
>binding
>and each Profile. The intent here is that the URI provides an unambiguous
>way to
>reference a binding/profile. This is specially useful, if and when, there
>are a larger number
>of published bindings and profiles.

The URI issue is perhaps trickier than it sounds.  You should probably use 
the URI for the specific bindings-0n doc, rather than the overall TC 
website, so that the version of the profile gets locked down.

>  The relevant e-mail address for the "official bindings"
>and profiles would seem to be the OASIS SSTC mailing list (the e-mail
>address for comments
>on the documents as a whole). This would ensure that issues discovered
>during
>deployment and implementation, as well as any new requirements for
>individual bindings/profiles
>have a home.

You mean security-services-comment, right?  Outsiders can't post to the 
regular TC list.

         Eve
--
Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com