s/Dirk/Dick/g On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Breno de Medeiros <br...@google.com> wrote: > Glad to hear Dick back in this list. Dirk, could we immediately move > to form the AX 2.0 WG (hopefully with a membership that is > representative)? I believe (and not because I am a member) that the AX > 2.0 WG needs to be the party addressing this issue because of the > necessity of preserving some coherence within the AX spec. The WG > should make a formal proposal to either move this into the umbrella of > OIDF or take it out, and get the bless for spec-council for either > option on a reasonable time frame. > > We have numerous speculative threads in this issue. At this point, the > very possibility of a result (whatever it may be) appears to me as an > unqualified win. > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Paul Trevithick <ptrevith...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> The only difference, e.g., between an Open AX URL attribute and an >> IMI-infocard URL claim is who’s authoritative over minting it. The question >> for the OIDF is this: Are the benefits of being able to be authoritative >> over the attribute URL minting process, greater than the benefits of letting >> go of that authority and increasing interoperability in the overall open >> identity ecosystem? >> >> Paul >> >> PS: The ICF said, hey we need a place for folks using the IMI protocol to >> know where the attribute URLs are listed. So we created [1] along with a >> very light-weight email-based process for getting new URIs added. It all >> works fine. This is clearly one way to answer the above question. >> >> [1] http://wiki.informationcard.net/index.php/Claim_Catalog >> >> >> On 9/17/09 4:48 PM, "Allen Tom" <a...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: >> >> Given that everyone using AX seems to be using axschema.org, we should just >> bless it. Perhaps the OIDF should take over running it? We should try to >> have an official process (hopefully very lightweight) for adding new >> attributes. >> >> +100 for making the urls shorter, since AX responses usually exceed the 2KB >> URL limit, and have to be sent via POST, causing UX issues. (browser >> warnings if the RP doesn't support HTTPS, an extra "white page" with the >> form and the button, JS dependency, etc) >> >> Allen >> >> >> >> Dick Hardt wrote: >> >> axschema.org is shorter then schemas.openid.net and implies the >> schemas could be used for things other then OpenID >> >> given that though, I don't have a strong preference >> >> On 2009-09-16, at 2:06 PM, John Bradley wrote: >> >> >> >> >> As I recall the idea was to move the URI to use schemas.openid.net. >> >> Is that still the preferred option from your point of view, or do >> you see axshema.org continuing in some way? >> >> John B. >> >> On 2009-09-16, at 4:54 PM, Dick Hardt wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On 2009-09-16, at 12:28 PM, John Bradley wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Dick, >> >> That includes all of the schema work and AX 2.0 documents? >> >> >> >> All the work that Sxip Identity did. I don't recall that anyone else >> contributed. >> >> >> >> >> Who controls axschema.org now? >> >> >> >> I do personally >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> specs mailing list >> sp...@lists.openid.net >> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> specs mailing list >> sp...@lists.openid.net >> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs >> >> > > > > -- > --Breno > > +1 (650) 214-1007 desk > +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central) > MTV-41-3 : 383-A > PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7) >
-- --Breno +1 (650) 214-1007 desk +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central) MTV-41-3 : 383-A PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7) _______________________________________________ specs mailing list sp...@lists.openid.net http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
