For my use cases, the important things are, unscientifically,

1. Display name
2. Avatar / photo
3. Preferred link to human-readable online presence -- profile, blog,
whatever strikes their fancy.



On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:38 PM, David Recordon <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm sure that the data is wildly out of date, but at the time the SREG
> fields (
> http://openid.net/specs/openid-simple-registration-extension-1_0.html#response_format
> )
> were based on looking at what a few hundred different sites were
> asking for.
>
> I unscientifically think that the extremely common stuff is:
>  - Name
>  - Avatar / photo
>  - Email address
>
> Scientifically, we should actually put some effort into looking at
> sign in pages again. :)
>
> --David
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Jonathan Coffman
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Out of curiosity, beyond the email discussion below what are the primary
> > metadata needs around the other major (PoCo) fields?
> > Speaking to the use-cases I work off of here at PBS, I'm primarily
> concerned
> > about emails being verified (and a signup date is also useful) and am
> most
> > inclined to trust the OP (especially if it were a white-listed or
> otherwise
> > vetted iDP).
> > Jonathan
> >
> > On Dec 8, 2009, at 2:17 PM, Chris Messina wrote:
> >
> > Is it worth looking at how Facebook handles the passing of profile data?
> Or
> > is their architecture/use case different?
> >
> > http://wiki.developers.facebook.com/index.php/Users.getInfo
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Breno de Medeiros <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:01 AM, John Panzer <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> > For "one-time" URLs, you'd probably want to allow for retries for a
> >> > short
> >> > period (or just allow it to be accessed for say 5m) which would have
> >> > approximately the same level of protection.
> >> > You could also imagine long-lived capabilities along the lines of
> OAuth
> >> > tokens that allow RPs to repeatedly refresh the data as needed.
>  (Better
> >> > of
> >> > course if they can subscribe to changes, but that's an implementation
> >> > detail
> >> > and definitely a separate spec.)
> >> > Given that AX already supports requesting URL-valued data (e.g.,
> profile
> >> > photos) I think this just comes down to defining a fairly complicated
> >> > data
> >> > type for AX and passing a URL around.
> >>
> >> A more lightweight alternative is to adopt an 'artifact' mode where
> >> most of the OpenID assertion (request and response) can be passed in
> >> the backchannel. That is a bit more difficult to implement but easier
> >> to spec (because the existing URLs can be used) and more general
> >> (compacts all extensions, not only AX).
> >>
> >> > --
> >> > John Panzer / Google
> >> > [email protected] / abstractioneer.org / @jpanzer
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Peter Watkins <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 10:32:12AM -0800, John Panzer wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > provide to RPs.  If you send an endpoint URL to the RP instead of
> the
> >> >> > information itself, the RP can then retrieve it via a backchannel
> >> >> > (and
> >> >> > cache
> >> >> > it).  If you have private data, use a capability URL with a token
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > allows read-only access.
> >> >>
> >> >> Exactly. OpenID requests and responses are very chatty, and
> backchannel
> >> >> URLs could be an easy way to get around the 2k GET limit (the cost of
> >> >> course being additional time needed to make the additional HTTP
> >> >> requests).
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't see any reason for backchannel URLs to be requested multiple
> >> >> times,
> >> >> so in addition to a request or response using strongly random nonces
> in
> >> >> the backchannel URLs, the backchannel URLs should be very
> short-lived,
> >> >> probably each side "SHOULD" allow a URL to be requested only once,
> and
> >> >> throw a 403/404 for subsequent requests.
> >> >>
> >> >> Is there any draft of AX using backchannel URLs?
> >> >>
> >> >> -Peter
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Chris Messina
> > Open Web Advocate
> >
> > Personal: http://factoryjoe.com
> > Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina
> >
> > Citizen Agency: http://citizenagency.com
> > Diso Project: http://diso-project.org
> > OpenID Foundation: http://openid.net
> >
> > This email is:   [ ] shareable    [X] ask first   [ ] private
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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