cahill conor p eomqplcwyrpvintelcom understand thats told however dont see flexibility written spec least whats doesnt appear ambiguity wording spec currently stands id like someone point says authninstant allowed something authentication user took place certainly problems errata directed ambiguity however dont see dont think errata people said discussed outside spec especially conflict current wording spec theres something wrong whats written spec sure lets fix case want errata id like hearsee proposed changes would conor original message scott cantor mailtobqbvdn6osuedu sent wednesday february 13 2008 138 pm cahill conor p rgpophadhxloraclecom tom scavo cc saml developers subject samldev value authninstant yes im bit pain sums errata would end saying spec call specific behavior parties ignored past going add errata says really need spec says asked tc way back saml required area sso told require behavior dont know else want say obviously dont agree original statement doesnt change said years ago probably saml 10 even came take issue idea ignoring anything told allowed nothing didnt optimal anything werent prepared time implies 20 could easily worded differently claiming doesnt mean thing think ac class probably chief part far tell thats thing got added 20 weve never discussed implications tc recall scott unsubscribe email zwuiopcitsxkbbpazwlistsoasisopenorg additional commands email rnzpzqvxvvklistsoasisopenorg unsubscribe email zwuiopcitsxkbbpazwlistsoasisopenorg additional commands email rnzpzqvxvvklistsoasisopenorg tue 05 aug 2008 203854 0800 samldev value authninstant