[OpenID] experimental namespace for openid.net

[Santosh Rajan]

What I am suggesting here is that Google go ahead without the experimental
OpenID namespace, and the namespace prefix. In effect what you are left with
becomes an "unofficial" extension to xrds, with two new elements defined.
<URITemplate> and <NextAuthority>. These elements will take on the default
namespace.
They can then explain this in their documents, that these are temporary
elements, and will be mapped to the corresponding elements when XRD is
released.

So What is wrong with this? And what have I missed here?


Santosh Rajan wrote:
> 
> You don't have to get so worked up about this. This is just a thought. If
> you can extend XRDS then your new elements will have the same xrds
> namespace. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SitG Admin wrote:
>> 
>>>Just a thought. What if you don't use a namespace at all.
>> 
>> Uh. I have *no* idea WTF this means, in context of the idea being 
>> discussed. Just to make sure we're all on the same page here, I'm 
>> going to quote from the first paragraph of Dirk's original post:
>> 
>> "Google would like to launch a feature in which we're allowing our 
>> Google Apps hosted domains to become OpenID providers. The 
>> authentication part of it is pretty simple - Google is already 
>> logging in users to their apps, so we can also host an OP endpoint 
>> for those domains and send assertions back to Relying Parties. What 
>> is more difficult is the discovery part. We have been working with 
>> the XRI TC to define a XRD-based discovery protocol that would allow 
>> this kind of hosting of discovery documents on behalf of our 
>> customers. "
>> 
>> Notice, too, the XML element *using* openid.net's namespace:
>> '<Service priority="0"
>> xmlns:experimental="<http://experimental.openid.net/google/2009/07/xmlns/>http://experimental.openid.net/google/2009/07/xmlns/">'
>> The "experimental" shows up in "xmlns": XML NameSpace.
>> 
>> I don't think it's POSSIBLE to not use a namespace in this case. I 
>> mean, it's kind of, like, THE POINT.
>> 
>>>And call it your
>>>own extension to XRDS which anyone is free to use.
>> 
>> Even if they did this, though, wouldn't it be using at least *one* 
>> namespace in the future? Kind of difficult to avoid domains on the 
>> web ;)
>> 
>> -Shade
>> _______________________________________________
>> general mailing list
>> general at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>> 
>> 
> 
> 


-----

Santosh Rajan
http://santrajan.blogspot.com http://santrajan.blogspot.com 
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-experimental-namespace-for-openid.net-tp24432471p24476706.html
Sent from the OpenID - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.