My view is that we should stop talking about 'identity' all together.
We should instead define the range of problems we want to solve as use
cases and go solve them. Identity is too much of an abstraction, it
can stand for anything.
+1 to targeting problems rather than ideals (at that layer).
The abstraction (of identity) is this community's strength and
weakness; it names the Purpose that brings everyone together, and it
calls in people from all over who may be able to contribute
something. This concentration of diverse ideas, though, doesn't
create a single harmonious overlap of equally distributed strength;
there are outliers, ideas that aren't shared much by others here. The
two are opposite sides of the same coin.
To restate this in a slightly different way, it's a popularity
contest: none of us can decide what idea will see the most adoption,
since none of us can make those decisions for everyone else. Nearly
any idea is probably going to be seen as a bad one by *some* person
in the group (Santosh helps make statistics come *true*!), and we
should each be prepared to occasionally bite the bullet and accept
that it's *our* turn to be left out in the cold. (Then leave our
unpopular ideas behind and come in for a warm meal and whatever work
has got so many members of the community in the commons house.)
-Shade
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
sp...@lists.openid.net
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
