OpenSAML user discussion

["Scott Cantor" <>]

Neill Miller wrote on 2009-02-06:
> Thanks for the response.  I think I follow what you're saying, but can
> you provide an example of what the XML would look like in that case
> without the type?

Yes, whatever you want it to look like, minus xsi:type.

> Also, any ideas on what that would look like in code since it seems the type
> is present when building the object:

I know how to do it in C++, that's all. I don't even know if the Java *can* 
omit it; if not, that's a bug.

-- Scott