It's at least not clear to me that we'd finish our own version of WebFinger/XRD discovery before the groups already invested in those protocols...! What track record do we have in getting specs to market in the last 6-12 months?<div>
<br></div><div>In any case, I don't think that any of this prevents us from advancing a collection of use cases on the wiki *in advance* of starting the WG. There's nothing to stop that work, so I would highly recommend spending energy and effort there, rather than justifying that on this list.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Work should speak for itself; once momentum exists, then I think it'll be easier to justify and get a real WG off the ground (either for 2.1 or some other related effort).</div><div><br></div><div>
Chris<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Santosh Rajan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:santrajan@gmail.com">santrajan@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
I think you have missed the point.<br>
<br>
There is a need for developing a webfinger use-case vis-a-vis OpenID. Your<br>
assumption that you can "plug and play" it into OpenID is too simplistic. I<br>
can see a potential "chicken and the egg" situation developing here.<br>
<br>
What if webfinger/xrd is stalled precisely because they don't have enough<br>
use-case/feedback to finalize their specs?<br>
What if webfinger/xrd is stalled because they are stuck between differing<br>
viewpoints? In this case our feedback may come in handy to resolve the<br>
issue.<br>
What if webfinger/xrd is stalled because of some other reason we can't think<br>
of?<br>
<br>
Are you all confident that the above is not the case and that we can happily<br>
wait for webfinger/xrd to finish their work and simply plug and play it into<br>
2.1?<br>
<br>
I think the idea that we should sit here and do nothing is ridiculous.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
sappenin wrote:<br>
><br>
> Replies inline...<br>
><br>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 5:10 AM, Santosh Rajan <<a href="mailto:santrajan@gmail.com">santrajan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> The way I see it we are the "end-users" for webfinger and XRD. Their<br>
>> objective will be to cater to the our requirements and others like us. We<br>
>> need not wait for them to get on with our work. Actually they can use our<br>
>> feedback to refine and fine tune their work.<br>
>><br>
><br>
> With regard to webfinger, that spec needs to be "specified" before we can<br>
> use it in OpenID 2.1. My thinking is that it would be helpful to start<br>
> formalizing webfinger since in the OpenID 2.1 spec, there will probably<br>
> just<br>
> be a single sentence or two saying, "email-like identifiers are supported<br>
> in<br>
> OpenID discovery by using the webfinger protocol".<br>
><br>
> From a specification development perspective, I'm not sure there's a lot<br>
> more we need to do on the OpenID side when it comes to email identifiers,<br>
> except resolve any issues relating to IPR. Do you agree?<br>
><br>
> That said, how do we resolve the IPR issues surrounding webfinger<br>
> (basically, all the points Chris Messina mentioned in his previous<br>
> message). To me this hinges on the webfinger folks picking some sort of<br>
> formalized standards process to work in, so that OpenID can use it<br>
> properly.<br>
><br>
> If you look at XRD, that's moving forward inside of OASIS. OAuth is<br>
> moving<br>
> forward inside of IETF. There's the OWF, but I'm not sure if they're<br>
> ready<br>
> to "house" a spec just yet. And lastly, there's the OpenID Foundation<br>
> (though admitedly this seems like an odd place to house webfinger).<br>
><br>
><br>
>> So I think we should form a working group of people like you, who have<br>
>> already worked on this, and others who may want to work on this.<br>
>><br>
><br>
>> But I also agree with Chris's view that we don't need more working groups<br>
>> and need to fold this into 2.1.<br>
>><br>
><br>
> +1. I don't think OpenID 2.1 Discovery needs its own working group,<br>
> because<br>
> I can see that section being only 2 sentences (I'm oversimplifying, but<br>
> you<br>
> get the idea):<br>
><br>
</div></div>> 1. OpenID discovery can be used on any identifier that is discoverable<br>
> via XRD.<br>
> 2. Email-like identifier discovery should use webfinger.<br>
<div class="im">><br>
> The only two reasons i can think of for the need of a separate working<br>
> group<br>
>> is to maintain momentum, and to have a group people solely focussed on<br>
>> discovery part of 2.1.<br>
><br>
><br>
> I think the people focusing on Discovery are already alive and kicking in<br>
> the XRD TC. They're going to solve Discovery in a general sort of way,<br>
> allowing OpenID to utilize it in a specific manner. In essence, the XRD<br>
> folks are doing most of the work already.<br>
><br>
> Moving forward, we need to figure out how OpenID 2.1 is going to be able<br>
> to<br>
> use WebFinger.<br>
><br>
</div><div class="im">> _______________________________________________<br>
> general mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a><br>
> <a href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general" target="_blank">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
-----<br>
<br>
Santosh Rajan<br>
<a href="http://santrajan.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://santrajan.blogspot.com</a> <a href="http://santrajan.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://santrajan.blogspot.com</a><br>
--<br>
</div>View this message in context: <a href="http://www.nabble.com/OpenID-Discovery-for-Email-like-identifiers---Draft-0.1-tp23832524p23880571.html" target="_blank">http://www.nabble.com/OpenID-Discovery-for-Email-like-identifiers---Draft-0.1-tp23832524p23880571.html</a><br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">Sent from the OpenID - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
general mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:general@openid.net">general@openid.net</a><br>
<a href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general" target="_blank">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Chris Messina<br>Open Web Advocate<br><br>Website: <a href="http://factoryjoe.com">http://factoryjoe.com</a><br>Blog: <a href="http://factoryjoe.com/blog">http://factoryjoe.com/blog</a><br>
Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/chrismessina">http://twitter.com/chrismessina</a><br><br>Diso Project: <a href="http://diso-project.org">http://diso-project.org</a><br>OpenID Foundation: <a href="http://openid.net">http://openid.net</a><br>
<br>This email is: [ ] bloggable [X] ask first [ ] private<br>
</div>