Yes, next steps? John Bradley <[email protected]> wrote:
>Fine with me. > >On 2013-07-24, at 6:44 PM, Mike Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I’m fine with that. What about the other specs council members and >> proposers? >> >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chuck Mortimore >> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:31 PM >> To: Lewis Adam-CAL022 >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group >> >> Opening discussion again to help push this to completion. >> >> I'm still not comfortable with "single authorization" as I believe it's >> antithetical to what we actually need to build. I do believe SSO best >> describes the use-cases, but I'm willing to drop it to achieve agreement. >> >> How about we drop all the qualifiers and simply call it the: Native >> Application Working Group - it's high level and independent of >> implementation, other than we're working on concerns for native apps. We >> can start with the current scope and it's easily re-charterable down the >> road. >> >> -cmort >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Lewis Adam-CAL022 >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> +2 >> >> We have written our own such function as we indeed call it an “SSO client.” >> It’s what developers understand. It’s what user’s understand. It’s what >> RFIs and RFPs call for. At the end of the day a name is just a name, but I >> personally find the name “native single authorization agent” to be a bit >> confusing. >> >> Let’s think about how this is intended to be used. An mobile user downloads >> a Twitter client, a Facebook client, a G+ client and some other clients. He >> signs on once and gets access to their information on >> Twitter/Facebook/G+/other. Developers will think of it the same way. It’s >> SSO across native apps. Imagine if the SAML WebSSO profile was named the >> SAML single authorization agent profile?? J >> >> adam >> >> >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard Sand >> Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 12:00 PM >> To: Ashish Jain >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [OIDFSC] Native application SSO Working Group >> >> +1. The name will impact potential adoption, foolish to think it won't, and >> "SSO" is a commonly (mis)understood term and often appears in business >> requirements, even though it is often a misnomer or neglects other important >> related aspects such as log off, session management etc. SSO is a name here, >> not a binding technical scope >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jul 18, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Ashish Jain <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I still don't understand / agree with the objection on >> openid-specs-native-sso. That's the intent and the primary use case. It will >> be far more appealing / understandable to the mobile app developers than >> 'single authorization agent'. >> -- Ashish >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Paul Madsen <[email protected]> wrote: >> oh and I guess I should have mentioned the plans for a PRISMA subgroup ...... >> >> On 7/17/13 7:51 PM, John Bradley wrote: >> Ok you have a point. NSAA then. >> >> I want it in red. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 2013-07-17, at 7:28 PM, =JeffH <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> request that the name be changed to "Native Single Authorization Agent", with >> the mailing list name openid-specs-nssa >> but "Native Single Authorization Agent" yields "nsaa" rather than "nssa", >> yes? >> >> thus "openid-specs-nsaa" ? >> >> =JeffH >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
