On 4/15/10 12:56 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote: > Phillip, > >> It may be that we want to support Webfinger. But I disagree with the >> example given. > > What example did I give? :-) I just cast my vote for Webfinger over SRV. > >> In general as far as the charter goes, I think that it needs to have a >> statement to the effect that the WG will liaise with the IETF and W3C >> groups to arrive at a consistent architecture. > > In my experience, liaising with the IETF is somewhat useless. It's an > organization that does not work that way.
Agreed on liaison statements at the IETF. In my experience those are typically invoked when the relationship with another standards body is a bit strained or the other organization prefers to work in a more formal manner. > It would be better to have folks > working on OpenID engage in the IETF, because that's how stuff gets done. Paul, what kind of engagement do you have in mind? Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ specs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
