RE: [security-services] Metadata errata items

> Other metadata elements are similarly confusing.  For example, the
> normative language surrounding <md:AttributeProfile> is exactly the
> same as <md:NameIDFormat>.  Likewise, the intended use of
> <saml:Attribute> is unclear.  If we're going to clarify one, we should
> clarify them all.

Fair enough. They're all equally clear to me; I suggested the errata because
they don't seem to be clear to others. The intended use should be
self-evident, I don't know what to do about that.

> In contrast, the <md:RequestedAttribute> is very useful.  The addition
> of the isRequired attribute permits <md:RequestedAttribute> to be used
> unequivocally.

In contrast? I don't see a difference. I would say the enclosing elements
there would be another case to clarify.

> Or clarified in a separate metadata profile?

Why should a metadata profile change the meaning of not including something?
That should universally mean the same thing everywhere; if it's not there,
it's not being communicated with this vehicle.

-- Scott