[OpenID] Calling OpenID 2.0 editors (was RE: Problems with OpenID and TAG httpRange-14)

[Noah Slater]

> On the other hand, openid is imposing identity semantics on the internet/web -
> and need not be limited to the semantics of bearer protocols. "Its just a bit
> pipe, stupid."

This is wrongheaded. If you are going to use HTTP and URIs you must abide by the
well defined semantics unless you want to head down the same path as XML-RPC.

> As OpenID is not really leveraging HTTP in its as-designed role: identify and
> locate web resources.

Of course it is.

> With little doubt, I the OP can choose to state that this or that redirect
> messages (treated as protocol states rather than references to resources) is
> an OpenID - a notion that need not be tied to URIs or to the smeantics of the
> HTTP service.

Of course they should. If you use HTTP and URIs must abide by the rules.

> As someone said earlier in this thread, an OpenID happens to be a URL, but
> that does not mean its a URI - or has URI semantics.

The 303 semantics defined in RC 2616 apply equally to URIs and URLs.

--
Noah Slater <http://bytesexual.org/>