<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=680540807-09022007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>As you can see in the wild by OpenID 1.1 implementations
taking advantage of Yadis (XRDS) based discovery.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=680540807-09022007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=680540807-09022007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>--David</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> general-bounces@openid.net
[mailto:general-bounces@openid.net] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Bob
Wyman<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, February 08, 2007 10:24 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
Johannes Ernst<BR><B>Cc:</B> general@openid.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [OpenID]
is openid 2.0 a lightweight identity system?<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>On 2/9/07, <B class=gmail_sendername>Johannes Ernst</B> <<A
href="mailto:jernst+openid.net@netmesh.us">jernst+openid.net@netmesh.us</A>>
wrote:
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote></SPAN>> whether you like XRI / i-names etc. or
not, that does not <BR>> affect at all whether XRDS should or shouldn't have
a role. In my<BR>> view, the complexity of the OpenID Auth 2.0 spec drafts
(the topic of<BR>> this thread) has very little to do with
XRDS.<BR><BR>+1<BR>XRDS would have been a useful addition to the OpenID
framework even if XRI/i-names were not included.<BR><BR>bob
wyman<BR></DIV><BR></BODY></HTML>