Comments on Auth 2.0 - Pre-Draft 11

[Josh Hoyt]

Oops, forgot to copy the list...

On 12/14/06, Josh Hoyt <josh at janrain.com> wrote:
> On 12/11/06, Johannes Ernst <jernst+openid.net at netmesh.us> wrote:
> > >> 9.1. Request Parameters
> ...
> > >>>     Note: If an OP-SPecific Identifier is not supplied, the
> > >>> Claimed Identifier is considered to have the same as the OP-
> > >>> Specific Identifier. If neither value is present, the assertion
> > >>> is not about an identifier, and will contain other information in
> > >>> its payload, using extensions (Extensions).
> > >
> > > This doesn't seem right; I read your text like this:
> > >
> > >> "If an OP-Specific Identifier is not supplied"
> > > and therefore openid.identity = "http://openid.net/
> > > identifier_select/2.0"
> > >> "the Claimed Identifier is considered to have the same as the OP-
> > >> Specific Identifier."
> > > openid.claimed_id = "http://openid.net/identifier_select/2.0"
> > >
> > > Which is fine, but doesn't cover the remaining cases, i.e. when
> > > Claimed Identifiers / OP-Specific Identifiers *are* supplied.
> > >
> > > The original / current wording does cover these cases, albeit I
> > > admit it is not very easy to read.
> >
> > So I modify my request to modify the wording in a way that it is
> > easier to read.
>
> Attempted.
>
> See http://openid.net/svn/listing.php?repname=specifications&path=%2F&rev=201&sc=1
> and http://openid.net/svn/listing.php?repname=specifications&path=%2F&rev=209&sc=1
>
> Josh