Conversation
_pages/saml/authentication.md
Outdated
| <p>{{ response_elements | markdownify }}</p> | ||
| <p>For example, {{ decrypted_response | markdownify }}</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
markdown inside HTML is not automatic but you can do:
| <p>{{ response_elements | markdownify }}</p> | |
| <p>For example, {{ decrypted_response | markdownify }}</p> | |
| <div markdown="1"> | |
| ## markdown content here | |
| </div> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you, that was what I was looking for!
|
Struggled with deciding between Markdown and HTML, open to suggestions. |
01d662d to
b25f87c
Compare
| Consent="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:consent:unspecified" | ||
| InResponseTo="_6fca7b78-9ab7-49f5-bd62-18c48eac3c68" | ||
| xmlns:samlp="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:protocol"> | ||
| <samlp:Response xmlns:samlp="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:protocol" ID="_7f3d8cd9-d3f8-4b47-a571-5272810d5073" Version="2.0" IssueInstant="2024-09-18T16:20:36Z" Destination="https://sp.int.identitysandbox.gov/auth/saml/callback" Consent="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:consent:unspecified" InResponseTo="_bf054c05-5b2c-4773-a6a9-9ba075a87bc9"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[Question] Are the Response attributes intentionally placed on a single line? Is there a benefit over the existing layout?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It wasn't intentional. It is what SAML Tool's XML formatter gave me. It does substitute vertical scrolling (which I prefer) for horizontal scrolling. Do we have a preference?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good question, I only noticed that it was a change. I don't think either way is particularly readable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In my opinion, the horizontal scrolling is better as it allows you to understand the structure from the "pretty-printed" indentation. Would anyone else like to weigh in with their opinions?
Note: Existing content in https://developers.login.gov/saml/authentication/#example-specifying-ial-aal-and-attributes follows horizontal scrolling.
| <ds:X509Certificate> | ||
| MIIDgDCCAmgCCQCwpieA9CKuDDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCBgTEYMBYGA1UEAwwP | ||
| U1AgU2luYXRyYSBEZW1vMQwwCgYDVQQKDANHU0ExDDAKBgNVBAsMAzE4ZjETMBEG | ||
| <!-- X509Certificate elided --> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[Request] Could you use a more common word than "elide"?
"abridged", "truncated", "clipped", "hidden". I think elide isn't a commonly used word: for instance, this is not how I use it (whether or not I use it correctly).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, I'll go with truncated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Correction, abridged is more accurate.
| <ds:SignatureValue>XT9CguQWKBvbqVsJ+Khu5/eyl09JVhHkUuyFHa98ViZUBVgL/Hc9gzwUr43CA7OVOO+uMfCc6WvPKeADF9w9kqJaUgsi8LiKC/nfDCY6+UiRoep2zmXyFJRAvrD/HbgVfayx/4Nn3ponRPZ/T/oezhimssFF66m+/UAwJekO9kuob+5n+uaOiFOMuHEycSdASH/iFnTSR1ajdo6AaLomG6YT8zJbuRzcKmesouAKPiQCJFt2cgstEs1zw8dvTgmozy4qd/0aMiZ52eGcXoORD8VZOQiY63HT8F4wkhk5eGU05sFcyfpg7dXNtKOfCddHwyngmgmPhpRN30ew5njg7w==</ds:SignatureValue> | ||
| <ds:KeyInfo> | ||
| <ds:X509Data> | ||
| <ds:X509Certificate>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</ds:X509Certificate> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[Nitpick] <ds:X509Certificate> open and close tags could be moved to different lines from the text contents (add linebreaks).
This would make it consistent with response_example.md (I'm also not sure how this affects syntax highlighting)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll take a crack at it.
| <p markdown="1">After the user authenticates, Login.gov will redirect and POST a form back to your registered Assertion Consumer Service URL with a hidden form control named `SAMLResponse`.</p> | ||
| <p markdown="1">`SAMLResponse` contains a base64-encoded XML payload that contains data that is encrypted with the service provider's public key.</p> | ||
| <p markdown="1"> The decrypted `SAMLResponse` contains a `<saml:Assertion>` element, which in turn contains the following elements: </p> | ||
| <dl> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[Praise] Description List in the wild! Thanks for using semantic HTML
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm still unhappy about mixing Markdown and HTML.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I find CMSes to be consistently bizarre in their authoring choices. The ones I've seen that are very straightforward for the author tend to be shockingly expensive. (or, I guess, we could just host a wiki)
88a2ab1 to
02cf5de
Compare
_pages/saml/authentication.md
Outdated
| <dt markdown="1">`AuthnStatement`</dt> | ||
| <dd>Contains the AAL that was used.</dd> | ||
| </dl> | ||
| <p>For example, {{ decrypted_response | markdownify }}</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| <p>For example, {{ decrypted_response | markdownify }}</p> | |
| <p>For example: {{ decrypted_response | markdownify }}</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i am wondering if it is more useful to have this example in the example tab than what is currently there. (although to be honest i can't see someone spending a lot of time looking at either, since as noted above by aj, it's pretty unreadable in its current state)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought about that and felt that it was also useful to retain an example of the encrypted response.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think maybe it would make more sense than as adding another tab to the thing on the right - it doesn't really make sense to have an XML example in the body and in the tab. we could have Encrypted Response and Decrypted Response.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unfortunately, that's a bigger lift. There's a lot of JavaScript that assumes that the "code" section has only 2 tabs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
then i think we should pause on this -- it'll need a UX/content review, and i hesitate to add that to ursula's plate.
02cf5de to
431b9b4
Compare
|
@vrajmohan please add more details in the opening comment about what this change is, what problem it's solving/why it's needed |
|
Please add more detail as suggested by @Sgtpluck. Since this is a relatively significant change, we'll need UX to take a look. Once there's enough context in the PR description, I'll add a ticket to our backlog. |
The existing documentation for the SAML Authentication response (https://developers.login.gov/saml/authentication/#authentication-response) is low on detail - it just states that the response contains encrypted data. The example provided is for the _encrypted_ response and does not help in understanding the payload. This change attempts to: - provide a description of the actual data elements returned - adds an example of the decrypted response
Introduces horizontal scrolling
431b9b4 to
1851500
Compare
|
@vrajmohan sorry, to be clearer, please update the initial PR comment where instead of describing the ticket you wrote:
When you open a PR, the description needs to clear to anyone looking at this PR, not just folks who know to look at the commits. Thanks! |
The existing documentation for the SAML Authentication response
(https://developers.login.gov/saml/authentication/#authentication-response)
is low on detail - it just states that the response contains encrypted
data. The example provided is for the encrypted response
and does not help in understanding the payload.
A question asked in Slack
could not be easily answered without digging through the actual code and tests.
This change: