On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Erkki Lindpere <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok, I'll do that. > > BTW. As I'm doing a bit of research how providers support Attribute- > Exchange, it seems their behaviour and supported schemas can be quite > different (for example, Google ignores optional attributes). So the > function might need a parameter from which the openid provider can be > determined, to allow customizations for well-known providers.
Cool, seems you're one step ahead of me :-) I looked at https://www.assembla.com/spaces/liftweb/tickets/329-Make-OpenID-support-more-extensible Instead of having two different methods that returns different extensions, how about a single def beforeAuthRequest(discovered: DiscoveryInformation, authReq:AuthRequest):Unit That way, you can look at the endpoint and add whatever extensions are appropriate? I would also like the most common providers (for me: google, yahoo, myopenid) attribute schemas to be supported ootb, but that will be a seperate ticket. If you made some good discoveries, feel free to open a ticket :-) /Jeppe -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
