Santosh, > Don't worry too much about these issues. I am convinced the folks around here > are pretty sure of what they are doing, unless of course we can point out > something they missed. I am sure they are, but i'm involved in this list to participate in it. :-)
> Having said that, I think the issue of concern here is "what format" rather > than "what attributes". But how do I know that they haven't missed anything? > > Don't worry about splitting he discussion. > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Chris Obdam <[email protected]> wrote: > Do we already have an inventorisation of what attributes and object should be > included into the model? There have been many discussions, but I am losing > grip. Maybe a Wiki? Where people can suggest needed attr next to what already > is available on axschema.org > > And what do we do wit axschema? There is the schema (formal) and the > implementation (JSON, something else). Shouldn't we split these discussions? > > Cheers, > > Chris > > > Op 15 dec 2009, om 15:46 heeft Santosh Rajan het volgende geschreven: > >> >> response inline >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Joseph Anthony Pasquale Holsten >> <[email protected]> wrote >> >> >> To your original point, I'm really struggling to understand how to get >> namespaces into JSON, and everything I've found is either a terrible >> reincarnation of the HTML/RDFa/QNAME headache, or a one-to-one mapping with >> RDF or XML. Makes me want to research the TLS+RDF and SAML assertion tech, >> and I'm in no way comforted by that. >> >> Why do you need namespace in JSON? I am quite convinced we can get around >> this problem with JSON. I would like to know if i missed something here >> (looks likely). >> >> >> -- >> http://hi.im/santosh >> >> > > > > > -- > http://hi.im/santosh > >
_______________________________________________ specs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
