Hey All, There have been quite a few questions/issues raised concerning the next iteration of OpenID Discovery. I have tried (as best as I could) to document these on the "*OpenID 2.1 Discovery WG*" wiki page ( http://wiki.openid.net/OpenID-Discovery). Please feel free to add or edit if you think I have missed or mis-characterized anything.
In my opinion, I'm comfortable with the current scope of the proposed WG -- which is (my words) "to come up with a best-practices/recommendations document that could/will be utilized in future specs". Assuming all of the Discussion points on the wiki are valid and make sense, then I am now of the opinion that we should re-consider the idea of having a separate "Discovery" WG. Also, we should re-consider whether this WG should "do its thing" before we begin the formal work of the Auth 2.1 WG. I'm really open to doing this any way (combined, separate, sequential, etc), but it seems like there are enough issues surrounding Discovery that it might be more focused and easier to deal with if it was part of its own WG. Thoughts? David ps - here are some (mutually exclusive) potential ways to structure this: A.) Create a "Discovery WG", whose result will be a "best practices" document that can be used in future OpenID protocol (or otherwise) work. Then, start the OpenID Auth 2.1 WG. B.) Create separate "Discovery WG" and "Auth 2.1 WG", both doing their work at the same time. C.) Have just a single WG, which addresses both "Discovery" and the "2.1" protocol.
_______________________________________________ specs mailing list specs@openid.net http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
