[mdx] Small change proposed to draft-young-md-query-saml-07

[Cantor, Scott]

On 11/8/17, 5:34 PM, "Tom Scavo" <trscavo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Honestly I think your diff (which is hard to read when taken out of
> context like that) is too terse to be effective. If you think it
> captures what we've been talking about, then by all means go ahead and
> do it, but I'm still not sure it actually clarifies the issue. I'm
> afraid, for example, the opening paragraph to section 2.2.2 sets the
> stage for misunderstanding.

I haven't looked yet at what you proposed, but it's much easier to just wordsmith/adjust the clarification we're trying to make if we're basically in agreement about the goal, which it didn't seem like we were until now.

Our goal was to say "eh, they're not exactly just SHA-1 hashes, but they almost always are, and if they're not the client won't know in a lot of cases, and the server can do whatever it prefers with it".

-- Scott