with this, CAS implementor must update all connected systems if breaking changes are introduced.
I use the version in url approach since a long time for webservices in my applications. I only support the 2 most recent versions. It has the big advantage, that migration to a new version can be made smoothly. On the other hand, I don't know if breaking changes ever happened to CAS before. Am 26.09.2012 um 13:14 schrieb jleleu <lel...@gmail.com>: > -1 > > I would take another approach and keep dedicated formats by urls : > /validate = plain text = CAS 1.0 > /serviceValidate = XML = CAS 3.0 > /samlValidate = SAML = CAS 3.0 > /jsonValidate = JSON = CAS 3.0 > > The problem I see by using new urls for new protocol versions is that in ten > years, we will have twenty different urls for different versions of CAS > protocol, returning different attributes... > > I only know the Java CAS clients and they will support to add new attributes > returned in XML response (some are already handled : <cas:attributes> for > example even if not described in protocol). I don't know for other CAS > clients if it's possible though. > > Best regards, > Jérôme > > -- > You are currently subscribed to cas-dev@lists.jasig.org as: > robertoschw...@googlemail.com > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see > http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev -- You are currently subscribed to cas-dev@lists.jasig.org as: arch...@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev
