[OpenID] Calling for Rejecting webfinger, host-meta, lrdd, xrd

[Santosh Rajan]

I don't know why you have dug up an old thread now. We have come a long way
in nine days.
And I hope this helps.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xri-comment/200911/msg00014.html
<http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xri-comment/200911/msg00014.html>

On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Dirk Balfanz <balfanz at google.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Santosh Rajan <santrajan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ah, I agree, semantic problem here. It wasn't a question, it was a point I
>> was making which I will rephrase here.
>>
>> If you wan't to Reject the <Subject> of an XRD (includes host-meta), you
>> need to prove that the XRD is "NOT a URI Addressable document".
>>
>
> Still not quite sure what you mean. Are you talking about rejecting a
> <Subject> during resource resolution? Or are you talking about the fact that
> a <Subject> is optional in an XRD? Or are you talking about the fact that an
> XRD must be about a URI-addressable resource?
>
> If it's the latter, I trust this helped:
> http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/2009-November/019500.html
>
> Dirk.
>
>
>> Simply making a statement to that effect is not enough.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Dirk Balfanz <balfanz at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, November 1, 2009, John Panzer <jpanzer at acm.org> wrote:
>>> > Okay -- just assume I'm stupid about this:  What's the question?
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> I also got lost in the variuos threads. Can you state concisely your
>>> objection? It's not clear from your first message.
>>>
>>> Dirk
>>>
>>> > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Santosh Rajan <santrajan at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > John,If you want we can leave out my reference to the other threads. In
>>> this thread I am only posing one question which I think should be clear to
>>> everyone.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 11:02 PM, John Panzer <jpanzer at acm.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Santosh,
>>> >
>>> > To tell you the truth, I did not understand your prior objections (and
>>> > the discussion has morphed a lot so it's difficult to understand the
>>> > current state of your objections).  I also don't understand your
>>> > assertion below "if you want to buy..." and how it connects to your
>>> > prior objections.  Note that I'm not asserting that your objections are
>>> > wrong, just that I don't understand them.  I suspect there are lot of
>>> > people in the same boat as I am.
>>> >
>>> > John
>>> >
>>> > Santosh Rajan wrote:
>>> > I am calling for the rejection of webfinger,
>>> > host-meta, lrdd, xrd, lock, stock and barrel. There are many reasons
>>> > for this. If you have read previous posts at the Openid forum you will
>>> > understand that there are too many reasons for this. Just read the last
>>> > few threads on this forum and you will know why.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   Here I want to
>>> > start the discussion on this rejection with the definition of a
>>> > "Resource".
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   "A
>>> > URI-addressable network document or service".
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   So If you want to
>>> > buy the current story given by the webfinger, host-meta, lrdd, xrd
>>> > folk, they need to prove that an XRD is NOT "URI addressable", if they
>>> > want to ignore the Subject of the XRD. This also applies to host-meta.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   So I would like
>>> > to hear from the supporters of webfinger, host-meta, lrdd, xrd.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   This is not to
>>> > suggest that I am not a supporter of all these specs. On the contrary I
>>> > do support these specs provided we can come with a simpler spec for 1.0
>>> > based on the fundamental arguments I have been postulating on this
>>> > forum in the last week or so.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   --
>>> >   http://hi.im/santosh
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > general mailing list
>>> > general at lists.openid.net
>>> > http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > http://hi.im/santosh
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://hi.im/santosh
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
http://hi.im/santosh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20091110/235b4a16/attachment-0002.htm>