Re: OpenID 2.0 Specifications
Arshad Khan wrote: Hello, Can I please have OpenID 2.0 specifications? Can I also request link to software codes for sever and consumer? http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0.html http://openidenabled.com/ http://code.google.com/p/dotnetopenid/ http://code.google.com/p/openid4java/ ___ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
Re: OpenID 2.0 Specifications
Arshad Khan wrote: Hi Martin, Thanks for this. Is it possible to get the specification in word or pdf format? I don't think this is published online, but you should be able to load the HTML version into Word and save it as .doc if necessary. Also, I am not clear if I need to read and incorporate the following specifications in addition to OpenID 2.0 Authentication document - OpenID Attribute Exchange 1.0 – Final - OpenID Simple Registration Extension 1.0 These are optional extensions to OpenID and so you only need to read them if they are important for your application. - OpenID Authentication 1.1 This is the older version of OpenID Authentication; a compatibility mode for this is documented in the 2.0 spec and supported in the 2.0 libraries. Sorry, I am new to this. Also, can you please advise if PHP version of code is available? http://openidenabled.com/ has a PHP library as well as Python and Ruby libraries. ___ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
Backporting the 2.0 extension mechanism to 1.1
I notice that, like sreg, the pape extension is supporting 1.1 by simply hard-coding the pape prefix on its arguments. This approach is troublesome for the Net::OpenID::Consumer perl library because it deals only in extension URIs, and supports sreg in 1.1 as a special case. In order to preserve the abstraction the library would need to be altered each time an extension adds a new hard-coded prefix in this way, which is not ideal. Therefore I'd like to propose that for PAPE and all future specifications the 2.0 extension mechanism simply be allowed in 1.1. I don't think it needs any modification in order to work for 1.1, except that for legacy reasons SREG should continue to have the sreg prefix reserved when in 1.1 mode. ___ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
Re: Backporting the 2.0 extension mechanism to 1.1
On 11/08/08 12:49 AM, Martin Atkins wrote: I notice that, like sreg, the pape extension is supporting 1.1 by simply hard-coding the pape prefix on its arguments. Where/how? To my knowledge the opposite is true, per the last paragraph here: http://openid.net/specs/openid-provider-authentication-policy-extension-1_0-02.html#anchor3 Johnny ___ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
Re: Backporting the 2.0 extension mechanism to 1.1
Johnny Bufu wrote: On 11/08/08 12:49 AM, Martin Atkins wrote: I notice that, like sreg, the pape extension is supporting 1.1 by simply hard-coding the pape prefix on its arguments. Where/how? To my knowledge the opposite is true, per the last paragraph here: http://openid.net/specs/openid-provider-authentication-policy-extension-1_0-02.html#anchor3 In that referenced section it says: For the purposes of this document *and when constructing OpenID 1.1 messages*, the extension namespace alias SHALL be pape. (emphasis mine) I understand that to mean that when making a 1.1 request the alias must be pape. ___ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
Re: Backporting the 2.0 extension mechanism to 1.1
Actially, that interpretation is not right. In draft 3, we have made it clear. [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 2008/08/12, at 2:35, Martin Atkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Johnny Bufu wrote: On 11/08/08 12:49 AM, Martin Atkins wrote: I notice that, like sreg, the pape extension is supporting 1.1 by simply hard-coding the pape prefix on its arguments. Where/how? To my knowledge the opposite is true, per the last paragraph here: http://openid.net/specs/openid-provider-authentication-policy-extension-1_0-02.html#anchor3 In that referenced section it says: For the purposes of this document *and when constructing OpenID 1.1 messages*, the extension namespace alias SHALL be pape. (emphasis mine) I understand that to mean that when making a 1.1 request the alias must be pape. ___ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs ___ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
