Even if we go for the big hug theory of cross protocol Attributes, We
will still need a schemas group for PAPE, XRD tyoes etc.
John B.
On 2009-09-17, at 7:30 PM, Breno de Medeiros 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)
_______________________________________________
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
