[OpenID] Press Release

[Peter Williams]

The mission statement and the associated journalism came across to me as focusing attention (because of the addition of several new Board members with this specific focus, the article claims) on ensuring openid adoption communities SHOULD NOT BE exploiting the built-in extensibility point of the technical protocol. Or, if they do so by themselves (because the protocol design infact provides for such), they are not cooperating "appropriately" if they define or use extensions without the blessing/ratification of the OpenID Foundation.
 
its a matter of tone - which is what mission statements are all about, of course.
 
-----------------
 
Dick expresses that this is not the intention of the Foundation - which I 90% believe. However Foundation PRs needs to be more sensitive.
 
If the Foundation has an intent or even a latent desire to have organized realty brings its 1000+, forever-changing AX-style LOCAL namespaces to the board for ratification when deploying openid2, it ain't gonna happen. 

As a gesture of support by a vertical industry for the Foundation, we could perhaps seek re-ratification of what we call our existing "Standard Names" namespace, however?


________________________________

From: billhwashburn at gmail.com on behalf of Bill Washburn
Sent: Thu 2/7/2008 10:58 AM
To: Peter Williams
Cc: Dick Hardt; OpenID List
Subject: Re: [OpenID] Press Release


Peter--

Could you restate your concern, pleasae.  What is it specifically you see/believe OIDF is declaring war on?

thanks,
-bill



On Feb 7, 2008 9:47 AM, Peter Williams <pwilliams at rapattoni.com> wrote:


	I'm a lone voice in realty *for* Openid adoption - because I saw reality in its design claims to be fundamentally de-centralized in its _operational_ web-management model, unlike the Liberty websso protocols. This property is required, if a web-scale technology is to get adopted in the mostly de-centralized organized US realty culture.
	
	The dominant news-reported statement so far is.. OpenID Foundation declares war on proprietary extensions to openid, and that's what the new board members joined to accomplish.  http://www.news.com/8301-13577_3-9866802-36.html?tag=nefd.top
	
	That war is likely to undermine the very argument about openid philosophy that I'd been using to get adoption traction - that organized, backroom realty could keep its necessary private-namespace handling while staying "in keeping" with openid community's de-centralized management values (if not actually "extolling" its values.)