[Openid-specs-ab] Developer Feedback

Anthony Nadalin tonynad at microsoft.com
Tue Jul 12 20:52:40 UTC 2011


The other documents don't describe the concept of a "request object" the other documents describe specific requests. I think that the description/introduction of the document is not accurate but I do believe that it's trying to get across the concepts of some framework concepts that rest of the specifications use in a very limited way

-----Original Message-----
From: Johnny Bufu [mailto:jbufu at janrain.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 11:18 AM
To: Anthony Nadalin
Cc: Pam Dingle; openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-ab] Developer Feedback



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:

http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-framework-1_0.html
(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 
Framework.


Johnny


> -----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