Arguments by David Brin, many of which I have also come to.  9:59:57 PM    

The article mentioned at /. deserves it more than any other with the same topic.  8:04:26 PM    

They are complemetary, indeed:

WS-Security and SAML are complementary technologies. SAML allows one security engine to communicate to another security engine using a standard XML syntax (assertions)....

WS-Security provides no representation for this type of information. Instead, it provides a standard XML framework for combining SAML assertions (or other security tokens) with SOAP payloads. [security-services mailing list]

  7:51:11 PM    

By the same token, it would be good to position SAML against other technologies that deal with security:

• Passport
• Kerberos
• Liberty (assuming it falls in the "technology" category)Relationship with XML Encryption / XML Dsig
• How it complements XACML, XKMS, SPML, WSRP
• How it fits with the WS-I organization
• How it's being integrated with the Java API (JSR 155)
• etc... [security-services mailing list]

Yeah, I would like to know that too.  7:39:16 PM    

Now, what I would like to understand is how WS-Security compares to SAML. I thought it was that they are more or less competitors. Somehow, I can't put my head around this situation. A manifestation of standard wars, I guess. [SecuritFocus]

A bit later: I was wrong. WS-Security is complementary to SAML.

  6:50:49 PM