We are mixing defining scope with defining the spec.

I'd suggest we set a clear, concise scope for AX 1.1, get it chartered, and 
then we can discuss how to accomplish the chartered scope.

-- Dick

On 2009-11-18, at 7:13 PM, Nat Sakimura wrote:

> That is a possibility, but selection algorithm for a specific request needs 
> to be explored.
> 
> =nat
> 
> (2009/11/17 15:28), SitG Admin wrote:
>>>> Sub-fields for "Privacy Policy pertaining to specific requests"?
>>> 
>>> Could you explain a little more in detail, please?
>> 
>> <XRD>
>> <Service>
>> <Type>http://openid.net/policies/privacy/1.0</Type>
>> <URI>http://example.com/privacy.htm</URI>
>> 
>> <Specific-Type>http://openid.net/policies/privacy/PII/1.0</Specific-Type>
>> <URI>http://example.com/privacy-pii.htm</URI>
>>       ...
>>       ....
>>       ...
>>       ....
>> </Service>
>> </XRD>
>> 
>> Pointing to external documents containing links to more specific Privacy 
>> Policies would entail more round trips, or at least more requests. Would it 
>> be possible to have a generic policy type for requests that don't care about 
>> these things, or would this complicate parsing for common cases? (I find 
>> myself thinking of XRD's as huge associative arrays, and remembering how 
>> annoying it was to debug code when I'd misjudged how deeply I had to nest 
>> [brackets] to target the actual values.)
>> 
>> -Shade
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to