OK with me as well.
(2013/07/25 8:02), John Bradley wrote:
Fine with me.
On 2013-07-24, at 6:44 PM, Mike Jones <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I’m fine with that. What about the other specs council members and
proposers?
*From:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>[mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>]*On Behalf Of*Chuck Mortimore
*Sent:*Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:31 PM
*To:*Lewis Adam-CAL022
*Cc:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>;[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:*Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
Opening discussion again to help push this to completion.
I'm still not comfortable with "single authorization" as I believe
it's antithetical to what we actually need to build. I do believe
SSO best describes the use-cases, but I'm willing to drop it to
achieve agreement.
How about we drop all the qualifiers and simply call it the: *Native
Application Working Group*- it's high level and independent of
implementation, other than we're working on concerns for native apps.
We can start with the current scope and it's easily re-charterable
down the road.
-cmort
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Lewis Adam-CAL022
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
+2
We have written our own such function as we indeed call it an “SSO
client.” It’s what developers understand. It’s what user’s
understand. It’s what RFIs and RFPs call for. At the end of the day
a name is just a name, but I personally find the name “native single
authorization agent” to be a bit confusing.
Let’s think about how this is intended to be used. An mobile user
downloads a Twitter client, a Facebook client, a G+ client and some
other clients. He signs on once and gets access to their information
on Twitter/Facebook/G+/other. Developers will think of it the same
way. It’s SSO across native apps. Imagine if the SAML WebSSO profile
was named the SAML single authorization agent profile??J
adam
*From:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>[mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>]*On Behalf Of*Richard Sand
*Sent:*Thursday, July 18, 2013 12:00 PM
*To:*Ashish Jain
*Cc:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>;[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:*Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group
+1. The name will impact potential adoption, foolish to think it
won't, and "SSO" is a commonly (mis)understood term and often appears
in business requirements, even though it is often a misnomer or
neglects other important related aspects such as log off, session
management etc. SSO is a name here, not a binding technical scope
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 18, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Ashish Jain <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I still don't understand / agree with the objection on
openid-specs-native-sso. That's the intent and the primary use
case. It will be far more appealing / understandable to the mobile
app developers than 'single authorization agent'.
-- Ashish
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Paul Madsen
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
oh and I guess I should have mentioned the plans for a PRISMA
subgroup ......
On 7/17/13 7:51 PM, John Bradley wrote:
Ok you have a point. NSAA then.
I want it in red.
Sent from my iPhone
On 2013-07-17, at 7:28 PM, =JeffH<[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
request that the name be changed to "Native Single Authorization
Agent", with
the mailing list name openid-specs-nssa
but "Native Single Authorization Agent" yields "nsaa" rather than
"nssa", yes?
thus "openid-specs-nsaa" ?
=JeffH
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
--
Nat Sakimura ([email protected])
Nomura Research Institute, Ltd.
Tel:+81-3-6274-1412 Fax:+81-3-6274-1547
本メールに含まれる情報は機密情報であり、宛先に記載されている方のみに送信
することを意図しております。意図された受取人以外の方によるこれらの情報の
開示、複製、再配布や転送など一切の利用が禁止されています。誤って本メール
を受信された場合は、申し訳ございませんが、送信者までお知らせいただき、受
信されたメールを削除していただきますようお願い致します。
PLEASE READ:
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and intended
for the named recipient(s) only.
If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby
notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message
in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete your copy from
your system.
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
