Syntax for activation condition

[Lalith Jayaweera]

Thanks Scott

I will keep the inline constructor as it works but doubt remain
unanswered....

As per my understanding both the syntax should work in 3.3.x

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Cantor, Scott <cantor.2 at osu.edu> wrote:

> On 6/28/17, 11:30 PM, "users on behalf of Lalith Jayaweera" <
> users-bounces at shibboleth.net on behalf of ljayaweera at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am unclear as to what the difference between these two
>
> None that I can see, so I don't accept at face value that they work
> differently.
>
> >.....I encountered before as well, that, only inline constructor
> > works....basically as a need I dont need,SAML2PersistentGenerator been
> applied to listed relyingParties,
> > as SAML2AttributeSourcedGenerator defined for those two relyingParties.
>
> That's about Format selection, not generally restricting generators to
> specific RPs.
>
> -- Scott
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list send an email to
> users-unsubscribe at shibboleth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20170630/c5941f52/attachment.html>