[OpenID] Case for a unified scheme for OpenID "oid:"

[SitG Admin]

>1) OpenID would like to support more schemes than the http scheme 
>alone. However this would be impractical because it would only 
>increase in complexity with each scheme supported in future.

You said this before:

>I realized this would only let the cat among the pigeons. We could 
>not allow an infinite no of schemes that come up in the future 
>asking for OpenID support.

Now that you're making it an argument for defining an additional 
theme, rather than an argument against ("allowing") OpenID to support 
more schemes, I'm going to draw your attention to something 
peripheral to your interests:

Communication schemas.

Specifically, bitnet addresses. Sending messages uphill, through the 
snow, BOTH WAYS (and loving it, dammit).

You've argued for allowing E-mail addresses as OpenID's, but this 
misses the point: WHY are E-mail addresses even in use here? Because 
we've already headed down that slippery slope of adapting technology 
to what seems to work better at the time, that's why.

Allowing the Identity technology of our future to accept new schemas 
would be like allowing our communications technology to accept 
E-mail: then we have our bitnet addresses AND our E-mail addresses, 
it all just becomes more complicated in time! If future generations 
come up with some new fad schema that they'd like to see adopted, 
they can waste a few years struggling to make that happen before 
either the fad passes (likely; new ideas for the latest and greatest 
occur at least that often) or they give up realizing the futility of 
it all.

Like we SHOULD have done with E-mail.

-Shade