Re: [security-services] PE9 - Proposed replacement text:

In theory I'm good with this wording, but it brings into question our 
decision on E8 last week, where I pointed out that the current 
<RespondWith> wording asks for the QName of an element when the desired 
statement is native, but asks for the QName of a type when the desired 
statement is foreign.  I think if we change the original meaning, it's 
backwards-incompatible.

	Eve

Philpott, Robert wrote:
> Here is the suggested replacement text for PE9. in -core-01 this 
> replaces lines 968-970. In draft-04, it replaces lines 981-983 (of the 
> word document with markup display turned on).
> 
>  
> 
> Original:
> 
> <RespondWith> element values are XML QNames. The XML namespace and name 
> specifically refer to the namespace and element name of the Statement 
> element, exactly as for the saml:AuthorityKind attribute; see Section 
> 2.4.3.2. For example, a requester that wishes to receive assertions 
> containing only
> 
>  
> 
> Proposed:
> 
> <RespondWith> element values are XML QNames. The XML namespace and name 
> specifically refer to the namespace and element name of the <Statement> 
> element that must be present in the assertion provided in the response 
> to the request. The acceptable values for the <RespondWith> element are 
> the namespace-qualified names of elements from or elements derived from 
> the SAML Assertion <Statement> element (see Section 2.4.1). For example, 
> a requester that wishes to receive assertions containing only
> 
> *Rob Philpott*
> *RSA Security Inc.*
> /The Most Trusted Name in e-Security/
> *Tel: 781-515-7115*
> *Mobile**: 617-510-0893*
> *Fax: 781-515-7020*
> mailto:
> 
>  
> 

-- 
Eve Maler                                        +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems                            cell +1 781 354 9441
Web Technologies and Standards               eve.maler @ sun.com