It is clearer, but I think the charter still needs to be
clearer about what is meant by "digital identity". Is
the purpose to be able to access *any* stored data about
a person, or *specific* stored data?
In many regards, saying "any" is easier; sort out the format
for expressing attribute/values, and you're done. However,
then there are issues of interoperability (is there a minimum
set of identity data that is mandatory to provide?).
And, if it is "any", then how is this not a directory service
with additional labelling (addresses/names/identifiers) on top?
Leslie.
Peter Davis wrote:
On 1/19/2006 3:06 PM, "John Merrells" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 19-Jan-06, at 8:32 AM, Peter Davis wrote:
The goal of this group is to specify a protocol for moving identity
information between parties and a system architecture that enables
the development of software agents to manage a user¹s identity
information.
Perhaps you mean management of the exchange of user attributes and
authentication states between parties. 'managing identities'
implies to my
read as a sw which manages the storage of user data
A subtle point, but a good one. It will enable 'storage of', but that's
not the only thing, and not the main thing. How about...
"The goal of this group is to specify a protocol for moving identity
information between parties and a system architecture that enables
the development of software agents to manage _the_exchange_of_ a
user¹s identity information."
Yes, improved.
=peterd (http://public.xdi.org/=peterd)
_______________________________________________
dix mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dix
_______________________________________________
dix mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dix
