[Openid-specs-ab] Should we put self-issued into the Messages or should we create a separate document?

Mike Jones Michael.Jones at microsoft.com
Thu May 17 22:45:29 UTC 2012


In Messages for sure.  The whole point of including it now is that it is standard functionality - not optional functionality.  We need to treat it that way editorially, which means putting it in the main specs - not in a separate spec.  If it's separate, that greatly increases the chances of some developers ignoring it.

Then we'd end up in a situation where it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't and so people don't use it in practice.  The worst of both worlds.  (Sort of like how i-names ended up in a sometimes-implemented situation for OpenID 2.0, rendering them pretty useless in practice.)

                                                                -- Mike

From: openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of Nat Sakimura
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 2:30 PM
To: openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
Subject: [Openid-specs-ab] Should we put self-issued into the Messages or should we create a separate document?

We have self-issued OP documented at https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issue/566/messages-standard-define-self-issued-op .
We have built the code that works.

We decided not to create Userinfo token, but decided to include them in the id_token.
Registration overlay still have not reached the consensus.

Having said that, we should now consider where we are going to put these in.
In Messages?
Or a separate spec?

Please discuss.

--
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
Chairman, OpenID Foundation
http://nat.sakimura.org/
@_nat_en

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20120517/e92789a1/attachment.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list