Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

mace-opensaml-users - Re: SAMLNameIdentifier.equals

Subject: OpenSAML user discussion

List archive

Re: SAMLNameIdentifier.equals


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Tom Scavo <>
  • To: Chad La Joie <>
  • Cc: OpenSAML <>
  • Subject: Re: SAMLNameIdentifier.equals
  • Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:16:45 -0500
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=tP1pKYpBhYGKzWeC6BU3n+/xUSDvPW6OTizqPytFZxTaKVAuDdCXw2/Plwlyrz6fByu4l6h/OtRokmIYPWtr4skuDPuFCE3UGUExhWcqlkj6yi3FEiee78I/PfO1x/Ia5MxdSjNb65d30COYHTkwM6n4YJof5wwK6LisGG6JcOU=
On 1/13/06, Chad La Joie
<>
wrote:
> The serialized form is the canonical form and thus
> the one that should be used for comparison.

I understand why canonicalization must precede serialization (in
toStream) but I don't understand why toString is necessarily required
for comparison. You could compare the byte streams directly, right?
This is an implementation issue, but regardless, I think SAMLObject
needs an equals method.

Tom

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page