[OpenID] Open Challenge to webfinger and XRD

[John Kemp]

Hi Drummond,

On Oct 20, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Drummond Reed wrote:

[...]

> I find it odd that an XRD could really have no Subject, but again, I  
> don't know the use-case for that, or whether this is simply done to  
> allow someone to create Subjects which aren't named with URIs (in  
> which case, I would suggest allowing XSD extensions might be a  
> better path).
>
> I believe the use case for Subject being an optional element was  
> that in some cases the Subject will be implicit and therefore not  
> needed.

What does "Subject will be implicit" mean in this case - implicit in  
what? Would it be better to say "Subject is implicit in YYYY" (where  
YYYY might be an extension point even?) instead of saying nothing?

Cheers,

- johnk