[Openid-specs-ab] Developer Feedback

Johnny Bufu jbufu at janrain.com
Tue Jul 12 18:18:03 UTC 2011

On 11-07-12 10:50 AM, Anthony Nadalin wrote:
> -1
> The framework document does outline the basic structures, the other documents don't so calling the whole set of documents a framework is wrong

I read it the other way around:

(currently draft 3)

Abstract: "This document describes the more advanced request and 
response formats for OpenID Connect."

Introduction: "The OpenID Connect Core 1.0 specification defines the 
basic requests and responses."

More to the point, in the Framework document the term "framework" 
appears only once (as "trust framework"), an unrelated meaning. It 
doesn't elaborate at all on what one should understand by OpenID Connect 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Johnny Bufu
> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 10:37 AM
> To: Pam Dingle
> Cc: openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
> Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-ab] Developer Feedback
> On 11-07-12 10:10 AM, Pam Dingle wrote:
>> I like the idea of *not* using the work 'framework' for any specific
>> document.  That way the whole suite could be called a framework or any
>> other analogous term without confusion.
> +1
>   From the current Framework's abstract it seems there should be a better word to describe it along the lines of optional/extension/advanced (or just make it Core).
> Johnny
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab

More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list