RE: [security-services] Minor comments/questions on W28a-attribute-draft-03-diff

> > Line 128: "in order for an attribute to be returned" -> "in order for an
> > attribute value to be returned"
> 
> Will look at and reword as necessary.
> 

[Rob] After re-reading it myself, I think it is correct the way it was as
long as the point is that we won't return an associated <Attribute> element
in the response (which contains an <AttributeValue> element).  If we want to
be precise, we may want to use formal element names instead of descriptive
prose.