<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: [OpenID] experimental namespace for
openid.net</title></head><body>
<div>>Just a thought. What if you don't use a namespace at
all.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>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:</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>"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.
"</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Notice, too, the XML element *using* openid.net's
namespace:</div>
<div
>'<Service priority="0" xmlns:experimental="<a
href="http://experimental.openid.net/google/2009/07/xmlns/"
>http://experimental.openid.net/google/2009/07/xmlns/</a>">'</div
>
<div>The "experimental" shows up in "xmlns": XML
NameSpace.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I don't think it's POSSIBLE to not use a namespace in this case.
I mean, it's kind of, like, THE POINT.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>>And call it your</div>
<div>>own extension to XRDS which anyone is free to use.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>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 ;)</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>-Shade</div>
</body>
</html>