<html><head><base href="x-msg://400/"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">From a privacy point of view giving all of the information in the user-info endpoint all the time with only a single scope is not ideal. <div>Mike wanted to do that but have additional negative scope so that you could say you don't want things, but have the default be the common case. </div><div>This still requires defining multiple scopes.</div><div><div><br></div><div>We could just make openid the scope for the id_token. However that makes interoperability for the user-info endpoint worse than AX if that is possible.</div><div><br></div><div>I wouldn't want to get rid of nonce or state for security reasons. We could make those required for the profile and ditch prompt and display.</div><div><br></div><div>Other opinions?</div><div><br><div><div>On 2011-08-16, at 7:03 PM, Anthony Nadalin wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; "><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0.5in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; text-indent: -0.25in; "><span>1.<span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman'; "> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span>3.1 Why is there any scope beyond “openid”, is this spec going to be continually updated whenever a new scope is added/changed, seems like a bad idea to have additional scopes in the spec<o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0.5in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; text-indent: -0.25in; "><span>2.<span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman'; "> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span>3.2.1 Why have optional parameters, this should be basic (code and go)<o:p></o:p></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>Openid-specs-ab mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net" style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">Openid-specs-ab@lists.openid.net</a><br><a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab" style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab</a><br></div></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>