On 27-Dec-06, at 11:11 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
> I think using "cancel" would add consistency between the modes, any
> reason I'm not seeing why it is a bad choice?
Because then, only from the message contents, the RP wouldn't be able
to distinguish between responses to immediate and non-im
Bufu
Cc: Martin Atkins; specs@openid.net
Subject: Re: Consistency of negative responses to checkid_immediate
requests
Reviving an old thread...
On 12/14/06, Johnny Bufu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 14-Dec-06, at 12:13 AM, Josh Hoyt wrote:
> > On 12/13/06, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL
Reviving an old thread...
On 12/14/06, Johnny Bufu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 14-Dec-06, at 12:13 AM, Josh Hoyt wrote:
> > On 12/13/06, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Josh Hoyt wrote:
> >>> It's confusing to me make the failure response to an immediate mode
> >>> request be "id
The internet has only standards worth the name that were only
supposed to last for a short time. I think past experience shows that
our assumption needs to be "everything stays around forever".
We haven't even solved the \n\a problem yet.
On Dec 14, 2006, at 16:14, Josh Hoyt wrote:
> On 12/1
On 12/14/06, Johnny Bufu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 14-Dec-06, at 12:13 AM, Josh Hoyt wrote:
> > On 12/13/06, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Josh Hoyt wrote:
> >>>
> >>> It's confusing to me make the failure response to an immediate mode
> >>> request be "id_res", especially if
On 14-Dec-06, at 12:13 AM, Josh Hoyt wrote:
> On 12/13/06, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Josh Hoyt wrote:
>>>
>>> It's confusing to me make the failure response to an immediate mode
>>> request be "id_res", especially if that is not the failure response
>>> for setup mode. I can't s
On 12/13/06, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josh Hoyt wrote:
> >
> > It's confusing to me make the failure response to an immediate mode
> > request be "id_res", especially if that is not the failure response
> > for setup mode. I can't see a reason that they can't both use the
> > "can
Josh Hoyt wrote:
>
> It's confusing to me make the failure response to an immediate mode
> request be "id_res", especially if that is not the failure response
> for setup mode. I can't see a reason that they can't both use the
> "cancel" response to indicate that the OP or end user do not wish to
In OpenID 2.0, we have removed the "setup_url" parameter from negative
responses to "checkid_immediate" requests. This means that a negative
response to a "checkid_immediate" request looks like:
http://rp.com/return_to?openid.mode=id_res&openid.ns=[OpenID 2.0 ns]
A negative response to a "checkid
