For use in Key-Value Form, I didn't see it as necessary when I implemented the spec. It seemed logical not the be there.
The only reason why one might want to use this is to include some kind of non-standard information. Is that something folks would want to encourage? Anyway, changing the spec to have "openid." there now would break things, so I would not recommend it unless there was a really good reason. Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:openid-specs- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Nat Sakimura > Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 12:14 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: "openid." name space of KeyValue Form > > Hmmm > > That's a good question. The reason we put openid.* in the request and > response is that there may be other applications sharing the same > request/response. If so, it would be more consistent if we put openid.* > prefix to the keys of the direct response as well... > > Is it just an oversight, or did it have a good reason for it? > > =nat > > (2010/02/01 13:49), nara hideki wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > I'm thinking of the good reason why "openid." name space to keys of > > Key-Value Form Encoding used for direct responses is dropped. > > I think that we MAY use "openid." name space. > > > > I'm very happy if someone give me a good cue to understand the > reason. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > ---- > > hdknr > > _______________________________________________ > > specs mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs > > > > > -- > Nat Sakimura ([email protected]) > Nomura Research Institute, Ltd. > Tel:+81-3-6274-1412 Fax:+81-3-6274-1547 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
