We are all in violent agreement here. On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:57 AM, John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote: > In practice it is a process issue. Getting folks to agree on a registry > process is a larger task than adopting the 9 attributes in common use. I > see whatever is in the spec becoming part of a registry. > > I just don't want to hold up what we need for what we would like. > > John B. > On 2009-11-13, at 2:47 PM, John Kemp wrote: > >> Breno de Medeiros wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 4:05 AM, John Bradley <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 Fixing the missing policy URL and an agreement on a base set of AX >>>> URL >>>> need to be a priority. >>>> >>> >>> Such agreement may be hard to achieve, but a set of URLs to support >>> discovery of supported attributes would be good. I am inclined to give >>> on on URL registry at this moment and support baking them into the >>> spec directly, for expediency reasons >>> >> "Baking them into the spec" just says that the specification document >> itself is the registry, and that change requests are handled by the spec. >> editors. (so in practice, what's the difference between that and a separate >> web-page linked from the spec?) >> >> Cheers, >> >> - johnk > >
-- --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
