On 7-Apr-07, at 3:56 AM, Martin Atkins wrote:
> On the other hand, I also think it's a good idea not to modularize too
> early: until there's some implementation experience, it's hard to say
> with certainty what parts make sense as distinct modules. I'm not that
> familiar with the AX stuff yet,
Johnny Bufu wrote:
>
> These two seem to have been the rationale of the recent discussions
> about splitting the OpenID spec into core/discovery/etc., which
> seemed to make sense to a number of people (I'm just not sure if it's
> worth / good tactical move at this stage).
>
I tend to
Johnny Bufu wrote:
>
> I believe a key difference here is between what people would be
> willing to do, and what people actually (will) do. For example:
>
> - I would be willing to go to a rugby game, but I don't know if any
> of my friends are going, so I probably won't go
> - most of my fri
Johnny Bufu wrote:
>
> On 6-Apr-07, at 4:09 PM, Laurie Rae wrote:
>
>> Seriously though, the issue here isn't really whether or not you and
>> your friends will go to the rugby game,
>> it's whether or not the rugby league organizers are trying to get you
>> to go to the rugby game at the appropr
On 6-Apr-07, at 4:09 PM, Laurie Rae wrote:
> Seriously though, the issue here isn't really whether or not you
> and your friends will go to the rugby game,
> it's whether or not the rugby league organizers are trying to get
> you to go to the rugby game at the appropriate venue.
I would say
Ah, but I ask you this. If a rugby player falls in the forest, does
anybody care? ;-)
Seriously though, the issue here isn't really whether or not you and
your friends will go to the rugby game,
it's whether or not the rugby league organizers are trying to get you to
go to the rugby game at the
On 5-Apr-07, at 9:24 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
> I'm all about taking advantage of existing momentum, but I have a hard
> time seeing anyone who cares about AX being unwilling to have this
> discussion as a part of the ID Schemas community. If there is anyone,
> I'd certainly like to understand
On 6-Apr-07, at 10:34 AM, Johannes Ernst wrote:
>> Well, as one of the people that wrote the documents. We decided that
>> having separate documents was better. Thanks for sharing your
>> opinion. I have a different opinion.
>
> For somebody who currently doesn't have an opinion on this subject,
On 4/6/07, Dick Hardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5-Apr-07, at 9:18 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
> > I'm fine with doing things differently, I'm not arguing that a
> > metadata
> > format should not be created, just that IMHO for simplicity sake of
> > reading the AX documents this format descrip
On Apr 6, 2007, at 10:21, Dick Hardt wrote:
On 5-Apr-07, at 9:18 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
... IMHO for simplicity sake of
reading the AX documents this format description should be merged
into
the core protocol spec. If down the road it should be split out
then it always can be.
Well,
On 5-Apr-07, at 9:24 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
> Dick, see my other message but this is not about ME stopping you!
>>> We wanted to publish them on the website so that other people could
>>> look at them, but you did not want to do that, and you control the
>>> domain.
>>
>> Dick, that isn't a f
On 5-Apr-07, at 9:18 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
>> I don't think this is really that important of a point given all the
>> other things we need to do. People are doing to do things different
>> then you would, but get the same result -- is that ok?
> I'm fine with doing things differently, I'm no
why (beyond it being
"hard").
--David
-Original Message-
From: Dick Hardt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 9:18 AM
To: Recordon, David
Cc: Drummond Reed; Johnny Bufu; OpenID specs list;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace
If you would let us put the attributes on the website, then other
people could see them and comment on them.
On 5-Apr-07, at 9:02 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
> I guess I don't see why blaming the ID Schemas project for not much
> happening is a good excuse for not doing it there.
Blame? ... jus
To: Recordon, David
Cc: Johnny Bufu; OpenID specs list
Subject: Re: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace URI rollback)
On 5-Apr-07, at 9:06 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
>> Actually it is describing a document format, and it could easily be
> used
>> by other groups as evidenced by
On Apr 5, 2007, at 9:02, Recordon, David wrote:
In some senses, I think if people gather as part of the ID
Schemas project and try to move this work forward, it will actually be
more successful than trying to do it here.
I would agree with this.
Johannes Ernst
NetMesh Inc.
http://n
On 5-Apr-07, at 9:06 AM, Recordon, David wrote:
>> Actually it is describing a document format, and it could easily be
> used
>> by other groups as evidenced by references from people in the ID
> Schemas
>> group.
> I agree that it could be, but is anyone?
It leaves the option open.
> I love sh
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 8:27 AM
To: Recordon, David
Cc: Johnny Bufu; OpenID specs list
Subject: Re: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace URI rollback)
On 4-Apr-07, at 1:16 PM, Recordon, David wrote:
> Johnny,
> I see a lot of, at least my initial confusion,
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 8:00 AM
To: Drummond Reed
Cc: Recordon, David; 'Johnny Bufu'; 'OpenID specs list'
Subject: Re: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace URI rollback)
Doing the work in the ID Schemas project was a good idea 3 months ago
and
On 4-Apr-07, at 1:16 PM, Recordon, David wrote:
> Johnny,
> I see a lot of, at least my initial confusion, coming from there being
> multiple documents. This is why I urge merging the transport and
> metadata since the reality is they currently are only being used with
> each other. As the meta
ril 04, 2007 1:16 PM
> To: Johnny Bufu
> Cc: OpenID specs list
> Subject: RE: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace URI rollback)
>
> Johnny,
> I see a lot of, at least my initial confusion, coming from there being
> multiple documents. This is why I urge merging the trans
: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace URI rollback)
Johnny,
I see a lot of, at least my initial confusion, coming from there being
multiple documents. This is why I urge merging the transport and
metadata since the reality is they currently are only being used with
each other. As the
.
--David
-Original Message-
From: Johnny Bufu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 12:39 PM
To: Recordon, David
Cc: Dick Hardt; OpenID specs list
Subject: Re: Moving AX Forward (WAS RE: SREG namespace URI rollback)
On 4-Apr-07, at 12:18 PM, Recordon, David wrote:
&
On 4-Apr-07, at 12:18 PM, Recordon, David wrote:
> One thing that I do think would be worthwhile in smoothing more of
> this
> SREG/AX confusion would be adding SREG support to Sxip's OpenID
> libraries.
This is on the todo list, and judging by the interest showed by some
contributors could h
Hey Johnny,
I agree that you're doing a good job especially with your pre-draft 5
review message. Let's continue that way! There have been things in the
past, not that you've done, which have certainly rubbed me the wrong way
about AX. Does seem like we're all moving forward though with good
pro
25 matches
Mail list logo
