> - Naive question and observation - but why haven't we brought the actual
> PAOS spec under SAML. Just seems odd that part of SAML 2.0 specs refer
> out to liberty (whereas everything else has been folded into SAML 2.0)
Because it wasn't donated, and because it's just a SOAP specification. It
has nothing specific to Liberty in it, any more than any other SOAP-related
work does.
One could just as easily ask (and I have) why we're using SOAP at all, since
1.1 has no standing anywhere.
> - 4.2.3 line 582. URNs should be double quoted - rather than single
I don't know for certain, I just left the example as it was.
> - 4.2.4 line 600. "SOAP request" -> "<AuthnRequest>" ??
It's both, but I clarified.
> - 4.2.4.4 should the optional <S:Header> .. </S:Header> be
> shown. The example in the SOAP binding does not include this.
Probably not, since both the SP-provided headers are removed.
> - 4.2.4.1 line 623 "bythe" -> "by the"
>
> - 4.2.6. line 767. Not clear why need reference to 4.1.4.5.
> Processing rules for POST
Because otherwise I'd have to repeat them. All the rules in that section
apply. They're security processing rules, not anything to do with the POST
binding.
-- Scott
