I guess I don't see why blaming the ID Schemas project for not much happening is a good excuse for not doing it there. People who care will either have to drive this work within the OpenID project or the ID Schemas project; I fail to see how the effort required in each differs greatly. In some senses, I think if people gather as part of the ID Schemas project and try to move this work forward, it will actually be more successful than trying to do it here.
Nothing done by OpenID in the past has intrinsically been easy which is why I continue to think that something being hard is not a valid reason to not do the right technical/social thing. I know that these two communities can work together, but the onus is on the OpenID AX side to make this conversation successful and drive progress. Cc'ing their list as well. --David -----Original Message----- From: Dick Hardt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 8:00 AM To: Drummond Reed Cc: Recordon, David; 'Johnny Bufu'; 'OpenID specs list' Subject: Re: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace URI rollback) Doing the work in the ID Schemas project was a good idea 3 months ago and 6 months ago. So far not much has happened there. I agree that having several groups do the same thing is undesirable, but we do need to get moving. We need URIs for moving attributes today. We can wait for the metadata [1] to get defined, and the members of the ID Schema group are the right people for that.[2] While it is desirable that there is only one definition of an attribute, and some people may define the same attribute through lack of knowledge of each other. The attribute meta data model proposed[1] allows for one definition to reference another definition to consolidate attribute definitions. Additionally, getting everyone to agree on the syntax will be hard. The model allows different people to define attributes in different ways. The market will decide then what works best through use. btw: Currently there is no consistent, extensible, self describing attribute schema system out there that I know of, or anyone in the ID Schema Working group knows of. We can start to define attributes in the openid.net namespace and then reference more "authorative" URIs when they exist. This would let the OpenID community define the immediately required attributes for people to implement and deploy AX, which will likely increase awareness [1] http://openid.net/specs/identity-attribute-metadata-1_0-01.html [2] Of course we have all the issues of IPR etc. at the ID Schema working group since it would be unclear what organization would be managing that spec. Over here in the OpenID community we are working to resolve that, so perhaps the ID Schema people could participate in a list hosted at openid.net? -- Dick On 4-Apr-07, at 10:27 PM, Drummond Reed wrote: > +1 to defining attribute identifier URIs/XRIs in the Identity > Commons ID > Schemas project. > > =Drummond > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf > Of Recordon, David > Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 1:16 PM > To: Johnny Bufu > Cc: OpenID specs list > Subject: RE: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace URI rollback) > > Johnny, > I see a lot of, at least my initial confusion, coming from there being > multiple documents. This is why I urge merging the transport and > metadata since the reality is they currently are only being used with > each other. As the metadata document doesn't actually define a new > format, rather references existing formats, I am unsure why it cannot > just be a section in the transport document. It is understood that > you > must use the metadata format for the schema URLs in the transport, so > the two documents really are coupled to begin with. > > I agree that you need to bootstrap a set of attributes for people > using > AX. As I have done so in the past, I'd encourage this work happen > within the ID Schemas project (http://idschemas.idcommons.net/) versus > defining First Name yet again for openid.net. I have no problem with > the spec listing a set of schema URLs, I just strongly feel that > anything non-OpenID specific should be hosted and defined elsewhere > since so many people have already done it. I do understand the > need for > the schema URL hosting the metadata document, which is why I am > advocating this work be done as part of the ID Schemas project to > provide this flexibility. > > --David > > -----Original Message----- > From: Johnny Bufu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 12:39 PM > To: Recordon, David > Cc: Dick Hardt; OpenID specs list > Subject: Re: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace URI rollback) > > > On 4-Apr-07, at 12:18 PM, Recordon, David wrote: >> One thing that I do think would be worthwhile in smoothing more of >> this SREG/AX confusion would be adding SREG support to Sxip's OpenID >> libraries. > > This is on the todo list, and judging by the interest showed by some > contributors could happen any day now. > >> Any thoughts on spec consolidation > >> I think I'd propose the following: >> - Remove http://openid.net/specs/openid-attribute- >> types-1_0-02.html (I >> do not believe OpenID should define its own schema elements for >> things > >> like "First Name" which are not specific to OpenID, defining a URL >> for > >> an OpenID enabled URL for example I think would be fine on >> OpenID.net) > > I understand that point of view and we were looking into determining > what would be the best place where this spec could live. > > However, since the AX's adoption will depend (at least in the > beginning, > before the metadata and automatic acquisition mechanisms are > finalized) > on the participants using the same "names" for the attributes they > transfer. From this point of view, I believe AX could use openid.net's > recommendation (if endorsement is too much) to use a set of names / > URIs > for the most commonly transfered attributes. > (Kind of like what made SREG successful -- having the spec provide / > something/ for a jump-start). > >> - Merge http://openid.net/specs/identity-attribute- >> metadata-1_0-01.html >> into http://openid.net/specs/openid-attribute-exchange-1_0-04.html. > > I don't think we should merge the AX core with the metadata > description > document. The first one describes the "transport layer" > for attributes and is reasonably close to a final v1, while the > metadata > is far from being final (no concrete options identified that would > drive > to consensus) and its progress is rather slow. > >> and seperating policy from technology? > > Not sure what you mean by this. > > > Johnny > > _______________________________________________ > specs mailing list > specs@openid.net > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs > > _______________________________________________ > specs mailing list > specs@openid.net > http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs > > _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
