On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <[email protected]> wrote: > Discussing the name is a distraction. The issue is whether the OpenID > foundation wants to be where identity work is done, or where the OpenID > protocol (and nothing else) is done. Again, the question is very simple: > OAuth is going to have an identity layer (that's a done deal) - do you want > to work on it here under the OpenID foundation or not?
It's not that entirely that simple. There are apparently other (different but with some commonality?) ideas for a next phase of OpenID activity, the v.Next stuff. So the Foundation also needs to decide whether to do both in parallel and let 'the market' decide, whether to map out some dependencies, shared technology components or even try for a common design, or whether to say "thanks but no thanks" to one of the proposals. It also needs to decide how much of that deciding to do up front (in the board) versus in chartered working group(s). Framing this bluntly as a 'take it or leave it' ultimatum looks (to a relative outsider) a little brutal, but I say that cautiously as I've not been party to any of the backstory or detailed debates. > Everything else (like naming, migration path from OpenID 2.0 to OAuth 2.0 > identity) is stuff for the WG to figure out. > > This is a fundamental question far beyond all this geek talk: what is the > purpose of this community? Where are its boundaries? Is this the hub of web > identity work, or just one tiny piece of it? > > I'm happy with any answer. Fair questions. There are folk on the foaf-protocols list working with foaf+ssl, and in the W3C social Web incubator group who are also very interested in answers... > It would be helpful if people would voice clear opinions on this rather than > going in circles (i.e., start with "I'm for/against doing this work here, and > this is why..."). I have no opinion on where these next efforts *should* happen. Having two 'Next Generation' groups here that don't share common requirements documents or documented design principles would be embarrassing to all concerned; covering that embarrassment by having those groups based in different organizations will only push the problem onto consumers. cheers, Dan _______________________________________________ specs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
