[Openid-specs-ab] Errata edits completed - please attend today's call at 4pm Pacific

Nat Sakimura sakimura at gmail.com
Wed Aug 13 00:30:02 UTC 2014


+1

=nat via iPhone

Aug 13, 2014 3:57、Brian Campbell <bcampbell at pingidentity.com> のメッセージ:

> Either of those work for me. I do, however, think that there should be a version number accompanying the errata. In my personal experience I've found that using dates as the sole distinguishing factor is very prone to causing confusion. 
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com> wrote:
>> I am assuming that the final titles will be along these lines:
>> 
>>                OpenID Connect Core 1.0 + Errata
>> 
>> or
>> 
>>                OpenID Connect Core 1.0 Incorporating Errata
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> What do people think they should be?
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I don’t think a version number of the errata should be in the title because the date could already be used to distinguish between different errata versions, should we ever produce a second set of errata.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>                                                             -- Mike
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: Brian Campbell [mailto:bcampbell at pingidentity.com] 
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:29 AM
>> To: Mike Jones
>> Cc: openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>> Subject: Re: [Openid-specs-ab] Errata edits completed - please attend today's call at 4pm Pacific
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Sorry, in the last sentence I meant to say that it *wasn't* clear to me.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Brian Campbell <bcampbell at pingidentity.com> wrote:
>> 
>> One question on the errata - what will the final versioning look like? 
>> 
>> Right now these have something like, "OpenID Connect Core 1.0 + Errata - draft 20" that I assume will not be the final titles. Will the final published versions with errata indicate that they are indeed errata? Seems like they should. Will the errata version be indicated somehow? Seems like it should as we anticipate additional errata in the future. So will, or or should, the tiles include something a long the lines of, "Incorporating Approved Errata -01" ?
>> 
>> My apologies if this is already decided or known. It was clear to me looking at these diffs.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:17 AM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com> wrote:
>> 
>> The new versions including all errata changes are posted at http://openid.bitbucket.org/.  Word versions with tracked changes on showing the precise changes between the final versions and the errata versions are also attached.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Please attend the call at 4pm Pacific time / 7pm Eastern if possible https://www3.gotomeeting.com/join/695548174 as we’ll be deciding what the next steps are for the errata process, as well as discussing the next steps for the OpenID 2.0 Migration spec.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> And of course, if you can review the diffs, that would also be highly appreciated.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>                                                             Talk to you later today,
>> 
>>                                                             -- Mike
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openid-specs-ab mailing list
>> Openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
>> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-ab
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140813/69872208/attachment.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list