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

[Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)]

Noah Slater:
>
> It's not an assumption, it's bordering on the absurd that I have requote:
>
> RFC 2616 § 10.3.4:
>
>   The new uri is not a substitute reference for the originally requested resource.
>   
No, but neither does the "originally requested resource" must be the 
claimed_id
>
>
> In this specific case, normalising to http://example.com/ is fine but if this
> produces a chain of 302/303/307 redirects to http://john.example.com/ the HTTP
> RFC explicitly states that http://example.com/ is the correct URI.
>
>   
http://john.example.com/ is the claimed_id, not a redirect. Of course 
one might submit http://john.example.com/ as the claimed_id from the 
beginning, but it's not required.

-- 
Regards 
 
Signer:  	Eddy Nigg, StartCom Ltd. <http://www.startcom.org>
Jabber:  	startcom at startcom.org <xmpp:startcom at startcom.org>
Blog:  	Join the Revolution! <http://blog.startcom.org>
Phone:  	+1.213.341.0390
 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20080306/86b6d0bc/attachment-0002.htm>