Glad to hear Dick back in this list. Dirk, could we immediately move to form the AX 2.0 WG (hopefully with a membership that is representative)? I believe (and not because I am a member) that the AX 2.0 WG needs to be the party addressing this issue because of the necessity of preserving some coherence within the AX spec. The WG should make a formal proposal to either move this into the umbrella of OIDF or take it out, and get the bless for spec-council for either option on a reasonable time frame.
We have numerous speculative threads in this issue. At this point, the very possibility of a result (whatever it may be) appears to me as an unqualified win. On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Paul Trevithick <[email protected]> wrote: > The only difference, e.g., between an Open AX URL attribute and an > IMI-infocard URL claim is who’s authoritative over minting it. The question > for the OIDF is this: Are the benefits of being able to be authoritative > over the attribute URL minting process, greater than the benefits of letting > go of that authority and increasing interoperability in the overall open > identity ecosystem? > > Paul > > PS: The ICF said, hey we need a place for folks using the IMI protocol to > know where the attribute URLs are listed. So we created [1] along with a > very light-weight email-based process for getting new URIs added. It all > works fine. This is clearly one way to answer the above question. > > [1] http://wiki.informationcard.net/index.php/Claim_Catalog > > > On 9/17/09 4:48 PM, "Allen Tom" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Given that everyone using AX seems to be using axschema.org, we should just > bless it. Perhaps the OIDF should take over running it? We should try to > have an official process (hopefully very lightweight) for adding new > attributes. > > +100 for making the urls shorter, since AX responses usually exceed the 2KB > URL limit, and have to be sent via POST, causing UX issues. (browser > warnings if the RP doesn't support HTTPS, an extra "white page" with the > form and the button, JS dependency, etc) > > Allen > > > > Dick Hardt wrote: > > axschema.org is shorter then schemas.openid.net and implies the > schemas could be used for things other then OpenID > > given that though, I don't have a strong preference > > On 2009-09-16, at 2:06 PM, John Bradley wrote: > > > > > As I recall the idea was to move the URI to use schemas.openid.net. > > Is that still the preferred option from your point of view, or do > you see axshema.org continuing in some way? > > John B. > > On 2009-09-16, at 4:54 PM, Dick Hardt wrote: > > > > > On 2009-09-16, at 12:28 PM, John Bradley wrote: > > > > > Dick, > > That includes all of the schema work and AX 2.0 documents? > > > > All the work that Sxip Identity did. I don't recall that anyone else > contributed. > > > > > Who controls axschema.org now? > > > > I do personally > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > specs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs > > > > > _______________________________________________ > specs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs > > -- --Breno +1 (650) 214-1007 desk +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central) MTV-41-3 : 383-A PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7) _______________________________________________ specs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
