[OpenID] Press Release

Thu Feb 7 16:59:54 UTC 2008

I don't intend to be rude Peter, but I'm not going to read this  
email. If you want to take the time to write a concise response, I  
will take the time to read it.

-- Dick

On 7-Feb-08, at 8:56 AM, Peter Williams wrote:

> That's fine, if life turns out that way. But lets see: I've seen  
> many a standards committee try to rig  a particular view of  
> operational culture through compliance rules, and domineering  
> spinware. The foundation looks overly tech-heavy. It may need some  
> independents - folks who can turn the conscience of corporate  
> culture but not become obstructionist to a tech-lead initiative  
> (and I've seen lots of obstructionist independents, too!)
>
> US Realty has ~1000 namespaces, whose fields address largely the  
> same housing features, in each market. All attempts in the (NAR)  
> trade association - a group with about a million members and large  
> sums to lobby Congress with - to get buyin to "standard names" has  
> largely failed - mostly because local communities see great  
> (cultural) value in their local choice of name or additional  
> selling feature (of your property) that has great relevance in one  
> area - when marketing "island" properties - but has no relevance in  
> others  - when marketing a condo in a downtown building complex.  
> Unlike Google (which markets names globally), realtors typically  
> market only in a 5mile radius area. The pricing and marketing  
> dynamics in that area may be quite different to the area with the  
> same house plans that is just "up the hill"... Thus local names  
> have a propensity to stick around and are often, in fact, a way of  
> distinguishing a particular real estate investment culture and its  
> the realty sub-markets that a commercial property investor, say,  
> creates.
>
> Are these namespaces proprietary? Well in as sense they are (not  
> that they have any direct value). They are the work product and  
> practices design of the 500 Realtors who make up city X, in State  
> Y. Usually, the namespace has sub-name spaces - the terms of art  
> used by the 10 realtors who are specializing in the _future_  
> commercial property in that new shopping zone the city government  
> is thinking about issuing a bond for, where the old steel mill used  
> to be.... The field will probably be called BondX= with sub-values  
> that are an enumation (zone A, zone B ,zone C) which mean  
> absolutely nothing of course to the rest of the world outside that  
> 5 mile area and that city's financing budgets, but which imply  
> property valuation and investment potential - that obviously  
> affects current and futures pricing.
>
> Now, we have all those names, and their mappings onto standard  
> names. We have the names the magazine publishers use (e.g. Google  
> listing snippets posted off up into GoogleBase, amongst 10,000  
> others places) And, at this point its trivial to map some of the  
> fields into yet more "standard names" defined in openid AX. But,  
> when the realtor wants the local name for the same thing, I have to  
> be able to deliver it. Otherwise your 50+ year old grandmother who  
> has sold houses for 20 years will be very upset with me. At least  
> 500,000 grandmothers make up NAR and they often apply a collective  
> lobbying voice that makes Congressmen tremble. Woebetide the IT  
> person that decides to change a screen layout... or the name or  
> order of presentation of bath# vs bathroom-permits#!
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Dick Hardt [mailto:dick at sxip.com]
> Sent: Thu 2/7/2008 8:13 AM
> To: Peter Williams
> Cc: Bill Washburn; OpenID List
> Subject: Re: [OpenID] Press Release
>
>
>
> Peter
>
> I would imagine the intent of the phrase is to keep the core of
> OpenID from becoming proprietary.
>
> I would encourage you to define new properties in your own namespace
> for your sub-community. If there is a reason why they need to be
> proprietary -- ie you want to control who can use them, I don't see
> that as evil. I would expect that many of the new properties would be
> of interest to all members in the sub-community.
>
> The OpenID Foundation does not determine the protocol. The protocol
> is determined by the community. Extensions and enhancements are
> determined by the community. Anyone of course can write their own
> extensions, and they can be proprietary. They just won't be able to
> be called part of OpenID if they are not approved according to the
> OpenID Intellectual Property Process.
>
>         http://openid.net/ipr/OpenID_Process_Document_
> (Final_Clean_20071221).pdf
>
> -- Dick
>
> On 7-Feb-08, at 7:52 AM, Peter Williams wrote:
>
>> What does this mean?
>>
>> "OpenID was always intended to be a decentralized sign-on system,
>> so it's fantastic to join a foundation committed to keeping it free
>> and unencumbered by proprietary extensions."
>>
>> If I want for my sub-community to define my own namespace in the AX
>> protocol (as the technology allows), am I an evil "proprietary
>> extension maker"?
>>
>> If I want to define my own tags for use the the extensible XRD, am
>> I an evil...
>>
>> Can only the OpenID Foundation use all those extension points in
>> the protocol?
>>
>> Unlike SSL (which allows for privately defined extensions), and
>> unlike X.509 (which allows for privately defined extensions), in
>> OpenID culture will there be can be allowance for privately defined
>> extensions?
>>
>> I think we need an explicit mechanism for denoting which extensions
>> are privately-defined (and which therefore have community blessing
>> for their creation and use in the defined sub-community).
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: general-bounces at openid.net on behalf of Bill Washburn
>> Sent: Thu 2/7/2008 7:26 AM
>> To: OpenID List
>> Subject: [OpenID] Press Release
>>
>>
>> FYI...
>>
>> http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=818650
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> SOURCE: OpenID Foundation
>>
>>  <http://openid.net/foundation>
>> Feb 07, 2008 09:00 ET
>>
>> Technology Leaders Join OpenID Foundation to Promote Open Identity
>> Management on the Web
>>
>>
>> OpenID Foundation to Support Internet User Single Sign-On Technology
>>
>>
>> CORVALLIS, OR--(Marketwire - February 7, 2008) - The OpenID
>> Foundation <http://openid.net/foundation>  today announced that
>> Google (NASDAQ: GOOG <http://www.marketwire.com/mw/stock.jsp?
>> Ticker=GOOG> ), IBM (NYSE: IBM <http://www.ibm.com/investor/> ),
>> Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT <http://www.marketwire.com/mw/stock.jsp?
>> Ticker=MSFT> ), VeriSign (NASDAQ: VRSN <http://www.marketwire.com/
>> mw/stock.jsp?Ticker=VRSN> ) and Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO <http://
>> www.marketwire.com/mw/stock.jsp?Ticker=YHOO> ) have joined as its
>> first corporate board members.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> general mailing list
>> general at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>>
>>
>
>
>
>