[OpenID] why is xri so obtuse?

James A. Donald jamesd at echeque.com
Tue Jan 2 01:38:46 UTC 2007

Drummond Reed wrote:
> 1) XRI is an open, public, royalty-free identifier standard developed at
> OASIS. It is every bit as free as the URI or IRI specifications from IETF
> (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt and
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt).

Anyone, including Microsoft, can declare open public royalty-free 
standards for interfacing to their proprietary for profit services, and 
their proprietary for profit software, and with great regularity 
Microsoft does exactly that.

> 2) The use of XRI does NOT require the use of XRI global registry services.
> Although such registries are supported by XRI architecture, they are only
> one option. You can also use XRI infrastructure with a) DNS names, b) IP
> addresses, or c) complete p2p identification and resolution as described by
> XRI TC co-chair Gabe Wachob in his blog entry at
> http://blog.wachob.com/2006/12/xri_is_a_networ.html. 

Which says that anyone can be a root if others treat him so - but every 
XRI name space requires a single root, who thus has monopoly control of 
that namespace.

But what we really want is a namespace where no one is a root, or a 
single namespace that is multirooted with as many roots as people who 
feel like being roots, and are treated by other as root.

Now in fact it is hard to implement such a system in a user friendly 
manner, but XRI is *not* such a system.

More information about the general mailing list