[Openid-specs-risc] openid/sharedsignals: Comment created on issue 158

[github at oidf.org]

openid/sharedsignals event

Issue Comment created on issue 158
Issue Title: Explore machine reachable approach to event definitions
https://github.com/openid/sharedsignals/issues/158

Comment: Notes from the call on 11/19: - Jen reviewed the current proposal - Mike Jones had some concerns about how this would work? - He thought a JSON schema won't be sufficient, and a spec would be required - (Jen) So does the WG think that just the schema is sufficient or we need a spec. - (Atul) What's an example of the insufficiency? - (Jen) Using the schema description of a field is not sufficient to describe the semantics of the field - (Jen) Not managing the spec lifecycle is one of the main benefits of the JSON schema approach, so if we need a schema, we will negate that benefit. - (Yair) do we need to specify the same common field across different schemas, or do we need to specify them in a common file? - (Jen) The schemas could have inheritance, but we could duplicate if required - (Yair) But if you duplicate, then it will get complicated - (Yair) We should think about the end-to-end process. If we had a schema, how would we use it, and then work backwards from there? - (Jen) A good exercise would be to go through a few events and see where this proposal falls short. (e.g. one RISC event, one SCIM event, etc.) - (Atul) Once you do that, we could divide up the rest of the events among all of us, and go through the same exercise -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-risc/attachments/20241119/6178988b/attachment-0001.htm>