I'm happy changing it from "AJAX". I think it was originally used since AJAX is a bit overloaded already and people normally understand the "flashy non-reloading" sort of thing when saying it.
--David -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rowan Kerr Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:50 PM To: specs@openid.net Subject: Re: DRAFT 11 -> FINAL? On 1/31/07, Martin Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think the spec is misusing the AJAX abbreviation a bit here, since > the usual approach to doing this doesn't involve XMLHttpRequest at > all, but instead works something like this: *snip* Yeah I've implemented a pure javascript demo this way (which works if the OP does a http redirect back to the RP instead of submitting a form). > So no, this isn't really AJAX in the usual sense. As you noted, you > can't do OpenID Auth client-side with XMLHttpRequest because of the > same-origin restriction. You also can't do OpenID on the server > because then the user's session cookie won't end up at the OP during > the request. It still achieves the desired effect of doing an OpenID > auth request without disturbing the current page, though. So should wording other than AJAX be used in the spec? Or do we just point to an explanation on the wiki. -Rowan _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
