Shibboleth Developers

[Chad La Joie <>]

Yeah, *if* we do this, that's how it would work.

On 2/4/10 4:31 PM, Christopher Bongaarts wrote:
> Nate Klingenstein wrote:
> > Shibbolizers,
> >
> > An idea struck me while trolling through another
> > attribute-resolver.xml file and talking to Chad. Would it be better if
> > attribute encoders were maintained in a separate file, like attribute
> > filters?
>
> I prefer to have them in the same file, but I'm OK with splitting the
> encoder definitions out from inside the attribute definitions. If it
> were done the way you propose (and the attribute-encoder.xml is read by
> adding a ConfigurationResource to the existing AttributeResolver Service
> in services.xml), then Etan and I could have our cake and eat it too by
> removing that ConfigurationResource and just including the elements in
> the resolver file.
>
> > I'd also like the attribute-encoder.xml defaults to be uncommented in
> > the distribution. Since the corresponding attributes are already
> > commented out, I can't see any harm from doing so, but it would make
> > the IdP more approachable to deployers.
>
> No problem with this.

--
Chad La Joie
www.itumi.biz
trusted identities, delivered