If we make the spec so that it is reliable, functional and cruft-free it should be applicable to pretty much any use case.
What these sound like to me are use cases rather than goals. If the use cases result in different requirements that is interesting, otherwise it is unnecessary. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Dick Hardt <dick.ha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 2010-05-24, at 7:51 AM, Anthony Nadalin wrote: > >> ensure the use of OpenID on mobile devices, > > Ensure the use of OpenID on devices > > > > Would like to make sure we cover devices that are not really in the mobile > space (like power grid meters, switches, etc) > > All the power grid meters and switches I have seen are servers, not a device > the user is using to log in with. > > > >> define profiles and support features intended to enable OpenID to be >> used at levels of assurance higher than NIST SP800-63 v2 level 1 , > > Define profiles and support features intended to enable OpenID to be used at > least 1 level of assurance higher than NIST SP800-63 v2 level 1. > > > > Want to make sure we set a goal that may be reachable but not to go after > the highest level and fail. > > word smithing ... > > _______________________________________________ > specs mailing list > sp...@lists.openid.net > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs > > -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/ _______________________________________________ specs mailing list sp...@lists.openid.net http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
