Please remember "oid:" is a urn and this is consistent with usages like "tag:something:something".<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Melvin Carvalho <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com">melvincarvalho@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div><div></div><div class="h5">On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Santosh Rajan <<a href="mailto:santrajan@gmail.com">santrajan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I have been thinking of OpenID's representing a universal set of identities<br>
> for months now. Given that we all agree that identities must be URI's, there<br>
> is one solution to the problem we can consider for OpenID v.next.<br>
> One of the problems with OpenID's is that it only supports a subset of all<br>
> URI's, the "http" scheme. One of the solutions is to allow OpenID to support<br>
> more URI schemes. But then I realized this would only let the cat among the<br>
> pigeons. We could not allow an infinite no of schemes that come up in the<br>
> future asking for OpenID support.<br>
> Instead I have come to the conclusion that the best solution for OpenID is<br>
> to register its own scheme. I will explain the suggested scheme with the<br>
> following example.<br>
> 1) oid:<a href="http://example.com/joe" target="_blank">example.com/joe</a><br>
> 2) oid:joe @ <a href="http://example.com" target="_blank">example.com</a><br>
> 3) oid:<a href="http://example.com:1234567890" target="_blank">example.com:1234567890</a><br>
> And here is the URI syntax for the 3 examples above<br>
> 1) oid:<host>[/[[path]][#fragment]<br>
> 2) oid: <username>@<host><br>
> 3) oid: <host>:<id-string><br>
> (1) and (2) are self evident. (1) is the http URI. (2) supports the email<br>
> like identifier. (3) requires more explanation. People are used to "id's",<br>
> which may be an id issued by a govt or bank or any organization that has<br>
> members. A lot of people already have access to this id which they are<br>
> already using online. It may be a national identity no, or a company<br>
> username or whatever. By supporting option (3) we allow those organizations<br>
> who want to support OpenID to continue to allow their users to use the same<br>
> id's they are used to. (Of course i have stretched (3) a bit to include govt<br>
> and banks which is far fetched now considering the security implication, but<br>
> lets assume we will be able to solve those problems).<br>
> Please feel free to comment on this idea which ever way you like.<br>
<br>
</div></div>I think <host>:<port> is normally used rather than <host>:<id-string><br>
<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> <a href="http://hi.im/santosh" target="_blank">http://hi.im/santosh</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> general mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:general@lists.openid.net">general@lists.openid.net</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general" target="_blank">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general</a><br>
><br>
><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><a href="http://hi.im/santosh">http://hi.im/santosh</a><br><br><br>