[PROPOSAL] Handle "http://user at example.com" Style Identifiers

Kaliya * Kaliya at mac.com
Fri Oct 20 19:40:23 UTC 2006


On 10/20/06, John Panzer <jpanzer at aol.net> wrote:
>
>  Kaliya * wrote on 10/20/2006, 11:57 AM:
>
> I think it is a terrible idea.
>
> 1) If you put something out into the market that looks like an e-mail it
> will be used like an e-mail. I have personal experience with this.
>
> I had a AIM handle for the Mac part of the universe kaliya at mac.com (it was
> not an e-mail address) but because it looked like one people used it like
> one and I basically had to go to .mac and pay for an account so that the
> wires did not cross.
>
> This came out of the discussions we have about a smooth migration path for
> our users at AOL.  In our case the user at example.com nickname is also a
> resolvable email address, though it may not be the primary mail account of
> the user.  I'd suggest that as a best practice, anywhere that a
> user at example.com nickname is used, it should also be a resolvable email
> address.  And there should always be an option to not use something that
> looks like an email address.
>

Why not just give them @aol*username.  or http://www.aol.com/username.  Both
are valid openID and it is NOT and e-mail address. I bet you have a tone of
users who simply have AOL handles for IM and don't want to activiate or deal
with e-mail systems.

I get that your users are 'naive' and don't get new things and some don't
know how to scroll.  BUT YOU CAN EDUCATE THEM.  at one point e-mail didn't
exist and we had to teach people about that.  I explain this stuff to normal
folks all the time these days. I think regular folks are willing to learn
this stuff to make the web safer and more convenient for them.



> 2) I think OpenID is new and needs a new way to identify folks. And it is
> our job to teach people about this new way.  Lots of services give people
> homepages within their spaces...myspace, AIMpages etc.  so they can use
> those URL's if they don't have one yet they can get one.
>
> There's a bootstrapping problem here.  It's very, very hard to promote the
> use of something that requires a more complex login flow to replace
> something that is very simple (albeit limited and in its own silo).  How can
> we cross this chasm?  Our suggestion is to support existing practice of
> user at example.org in a standard way,
>

This "e-mail is the standards way" is false. It really is not user fridnely.
I resent sites asking me for my e-mail and requiring me to use it as a
login. I have at least 4 e-mails. I use different ones a different sites and
can't remember which one I use were. I am all for figuring out Bootstrapping
but I think approach is miss guided.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs/attachments/20061020/05f7ce3c/attachment-0002.htm>


More information about the specs mailing list