Here are some additional pieces of information about Qworum, which hopefully
address your comments:
1. Qworum is an open web specification
At its heart, Qworum is a web format rather than a product. We intend to
make sure that this is and remains an open format, and we welcome
constructive critici
The in person chat was very productive, and I expect to move forward
with this proposal after the holidays.
Allen
Dick Hardt wrote:
I've been busy with other things. :-)
I had an in person chat with Allen Tom, Eran and Breno about what they
were thinking of. There was some discussion on the
+1, but I don't know who this Tom Allen is.
Allen
Breno de Medeiros wrote:
>
> Attribute Exchange (1.0), and Simple Registration.
> II. Initial Membership
>
> * Tom Allen, a...@yahoo-inc.com. Yahoo! Inc (editor)
> * Mike Graves, mgra...@janrain.com, JanRain, Inc.
> * Dick Hardt, d...
siiigh. That is what senility feels like.
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Allen Tom wrote:
> +1, but I don't know who this Tom Allen is.
>
> Allen
>
>
> Breno de Medeiros wrote:
>>
>> Attribute Exchange (1.0), and Simple Registration.
>> II. Initial Membership
>>
>>* Tom Allen, a...@yahoo-i
+1 but where does the "class" in the earlier post of mine fits into in the
scope?
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 6:16 AM, Breno de Medeiros wrote:
> siiigh. That is what senility feels like.
>
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Allen Tom wrote:
> > +1, but I don't know who this Tom Allen is.
> >
> >
I noticed a typo. Dick's mail address is not skip.com it is d...@sxip.com.
=nat
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Nat Sakimura wrote:
> +1 but where does the "class" in the earlier post of mine fits into in the
> scope?
>
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 6:16 AM, Breno de Medeiros wrote:
>
>> siiigh. T
Can you add a clear statement to the draft charter that implementations already
using Yadis will remain compatible with the output of this working group,
since, as I understand it, XRDS-Simple is intended to be compatible with Yadis?
Or is backwards-compatibility with existing OpenID 2.0 implem
Can you add a clear statement to the draft charter that implementations already
using AX 1.0 will remain compatible with the output of this working group? Or
is backwards-compatibility with existing AX implementations not a goal of this
work?
-- Mike
-Origi
