Dick,
I'll give you that one: that's certainly easier. But, does not cause some
confusion? After all, one's identity is not yahoo.com, but that is the
identity provider. Perhaps the prompts around the Internet ought to Say
OpenID Provider: instead? :-)
Presently, this variant works form
On 02/04/2008, Paul E. Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A solution that matches closer with what the user expects would be to
map [EMAIL PROTECTED] to a claimed ID of mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
The average user is not going to know what mailto:; is.
The mailto: transition would be something
On 1-Apr-08, at 11:15 PM, Paul E. Jones wrote:
Dick,
I’ll give you that one: that’s certainly easier. But, does not
cause some confusion? After all, one’s identity is not yahoo.com,
but that is the identity provider. Perhaps the prompts around the
Internet ought to Say “OpenID
Does anyone have the time to write an email - xrds discovery spec so
we can formally ignore it? And so people can argue with their dns
providers instead of on list?
http:// Joseph Holsten .com
On 02008:04:01, at 9:30CDT, Paul E. Jones wrote:
Folks,
I’ve seen discussion here and there
Does anyone have a perspective on Yahoo and AOL and their weak support
for OpenID? It is good that they are a provider, but shouldn't they
really also allow access based on an OpenID issued by signon.com,
myvidoop.com and others...
On 2-Apr-08, at 6:28 AM, McGovern, James F (HTSC, IT) wrote:
Does anyone have a perspective on Yahoo and AOL and their weak support
for OpenID? It is good that they are a provider, but shouldn't they
really also allow access based on an OpenID issued by signon.com,
myvidoop.com and others...
Joseph,
That argument was given to me yesterday, but I don't think you really need
to worry with your DNS provider unless you're also trying to operate your
own OP.
Suppose, for example, you have an ID assigned by myopenid.com. I don't know
what URI format they'll use, but let's say it is
Hi Drummond,
I pushed hard for RP identification for 2 or 3 months back around
October 2006. If anyone wants to go back through the archives,
there's a pile of other important reasons to have some way that an IdP
and/or browser agent can identify an OpenID-enabled site. The antique
thread below
George Fletcher wrote:
I think relying party sites that support OpenID could do more to make
it
clear on their home pages that they support OpenID (as often it's
hidden
behind another click). This could be as simple as some link tags that
advertise support for OpenID. Maybe a link to
