[Openid-specs-ab] Spec URL

[sakimura]

I think it will be "http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/#issuer"
instead of "http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer". 

By doing so,
clicking on the link will make the browser jump to the intended section.


The reason I raised this issue is because it is very closely related
to the spec publishing point which enables the above behavior, which we
would be doing in next couple of days. 

So even if we are not using
"http://openid.net/specs/connect-userinfo/1.0/" in the protocol, we need
to decide on it. 

Do we have consensus on using "-" as the delimiter
for the sub-specs and bindings? Or do we want "/"? 

By the way, most
referenced URL will be that of HTTP Redirect Binding. Is it OK to be 


http://openid.net/specs/connect-http-redirect-binding/1.0/ 

or do we
want it to be


http://openid.net/specs/connect/http-redirect-binding/1.0/ ? 

Now that
I have encountered with this example, it just occurs to me now that the
later seems to be more consistent in the sense that "/" represents the
hierarchic relationship and "-" is just a replacement for a space, but I
can live either way. 

=nat

On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 08:58:04 +0000, Mike
Jones wrote:
> http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/ works for me (and
then we can
> have URIs like http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/issuer
as well).
> 
> I don't see a reason to have URIs for the related specs,
other than
> perhaps on a case-by-case basis. But if we do need them,
they should
> probably be as you suggest below in option 1.
> 
> --
Mike
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net
>
[mailto:openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of
>
sakimura
> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2011 1:34 AM
> To:
openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
> Subject: [Openid-specs-ab] Spec URL
>

> On Monday call, we agreed to use
> 
>
http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0
> 
> as the spec identifier URL for
the core.
> 
> On the hind site, this may not be optimal. At the very
least, we 
> probably want to put the traling slash "/".
> Otherwise, we
would not be able to make that a publishing point for 
> multiple
representation of the same spec unless we do something
> creative with
mod_rewrite. I would rather use Apache's default
> content negotiation
capability.
> 
> We also have to decide on the URL for all the other
companion specs. 
> Would they be something like:
> 
>
http://openid.net/specs/connect-userinfo/1.0/
>
http://openid.net/specs/connect-framework/1.0/
> 
> etc.?
> 
> In that
case, would it be more appropriate to make the core like below?
> 
>
http://openid.net/specs/connect-core/1.0/
> 
> Other option (Option 2)
is like:
> 
> http://openid.net/specs/connect/core/1.0/
>
http://openid.net/specs/connect/userinfo/1.0/
> 
> etc. for the
individual specs, and
> 
> http://openid.net/specs/connect/1.0/
> 
> for
the "Index" page giving the list of all of the sub-specs.
> 
> I am fine
either-way, but Option 2 seems a little more attractive in
> the sense
that it has grouping notion embodied.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> =nat
> 
> 
>
_______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-ab
mailing list
> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20110708/76928ba1/attachment.html>