> So I ask again - does anyone see any issues with the > fragments being used like this: > > http://openid.net/pipermail/specs/2007-May/001767.html >
Seems reasonable in essence. But it adds complexity and removes some immediacy of URL identifiers-as-is. Do fragments need special handling just to handle id recycling risks? I'm probably missing some context, but can't the issuing OP make sure to issue unique IDs, like http://example.com/user1234 instead of http://example.com/user#1234 ? Hans _______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
