[OpenID] SREG 1.x attributes

[Andrew Arnott]

Shane,

To limit it explicitly prevents the erosion of the spec by people randomly
making up additional field names and starting to use them in conflict with
each other.  If I come up with a "phone" field referring to headphone
preference and you decide to add "phone" and use it for cell phones then
we're obviously in conflict with each other and our OP/RP will not get
along.  I like that SREG guarantees this won't happen by closing itself to
extensibility.

If you are thinking about closed-house special cases where you control both
parties, then party on and extend it if you so desire.  No one else will
ever know or care that you aren't implementing SREG according to the spec.
:)

--
Andrew Arnott
"I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death
your right to say it." - Voltaire


On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Shane B Weeden <sweeden at au1.ibm.com> wrote:

>
> Just to be clear - I am not asking for more work to be done on defining
> other SREG attribute types and names, I am simply asking for the spec not to
> dictate that the listed attributes in section 4 are the ONLY allowed
> attributes. There seems no logical reason to do so and it may result in open
> source (and other) libraries implementing restrictions which offer no
> benefits to consumers and may make some deployments harder. I really didn't
> think it would be a big deal.
>
>
>
>
>  *"Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)" <eddy_nigg at startcom.org>*
> Sent by: general-bounces at openid.net
>
> 02/12/2008 05:33 AM
>   To
> "general at openid.net" <general at openid.net>
>  cc
>   Subject
> Re: [OpenID] SREG 1.x attributes
>
>
>
>
> On 12/01/2008 09:02 PM, Martin Atkins:
> > Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) wrote:
> >>
> >> On 12/01/2008 07:58 PM, David Recordon:
> >>> http://www.axschema.org/types/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> So it would be fairly easy to extend exactly according to these types
> >> and everybody is happy....or am I missing something?
> >>
> >
> > It already has been extended according to these types. We called it
> > Attribute Exchange. :)
>
> Can you explain the call for extending SREG then and why AX isn't widely
> implemented anywhere as far as I can tell? Or maybe that's the wrong
> conclusion?
>
>
>
> [attachment "smime.p7s" deleted by Shane B Weeden/Australia/IBM]
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20081201/b3fe12b9/attachment-0002.htm>