Feel free to focus on yadis/xrds errata, but don't worry about XRD new fangledness yet. I'd even say don't mention xrds-simple. OpenID has been workable with yadis/xrds. But until the xrds-simple/xrd stuff gets near final, mentioning it will only confuse people and strain their trust.
http://josephholsten.com On Nov 11, 2008, at 2:46 PM, David Recordon wrote: > Yep, thanks! I'll be sending out a new charter shortly. > > On Nov 11, 2008, at 11:24 AM, George Fletcher wrote: > >> Great notes! Thanks! >> >> Martin Atkins wrote: >>> Here's the output from today's IIW session on this: >>> >>> >>> 2.0 has been finalized >>> bunch of implementations >>> found lots of spec bugs >>> >>> also gone and done oauth and email addresses and other things. >>> Can we >>> support these in the core spec? >>> >>> - Making the spec more readable and fixing bugs (eratta) >>> - Delegation >>> - Error handling >>> - Adding a security appendix >>> - could be a separate document referred to by the spec >>> - possibly produced by separate group >>> - Who controls this security page? >>> - Security committee could look after this. >>> - or Allen at Yahoo! will be editing a security document >>> - Clarifying XRI >>> - Currently there's no firm message about whether RPs MUST support >>> XRIs or not. >>> - Need to clarify how exactly XRI should be used with OpenID. >>> - Similar to the whitelist question. >>> - Clarify if RPs can white or blacklist what OPs they accept, and >>> vice-versa. >>> - Discovery of type of identifiers an RP supports. >>> - Clarifying IRI >>> - Updating discovery. Possibly including the new-fangled XRD >>> discovery. >>> - Clarifying whether association over SSL must/can use diffie- >>> hellman. >>> - Discovery of support of checkid_immediate. >>> >>> Exploratory work: >>> - Signature mechanisms. Looking at additionally supporting the >>> mechanisms defined in OAuth so that they can be closer together. >>> - Possibly deprecating the current signature mechanism. >>> - Public keys? >>> - Email-shaped identifiers for OpenID >>> - Could be a separate working group? >>> >>> There was consensus that email-shaped identifiers would be worked >>> on by >>> a separate group and possibly rolled into 2.1 if it's done in time. >>> >>> - Smart/rich clients? >>> - Could be in this WG unless it ends up being a big change in >>> which >>> case it could be its own WG. >>> - There's another session about this. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> specs mailing list >>> specs@openid.net >>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Chief Architect AIM: gffletch >> Identity Services Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> AOL LLC Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Mobile: +1-703-462-3494 >> Office: +1-703-265-2544 Blog: http:// >> practicalid.blogspot.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
