RFC: Final outstanding issues with the OpenID 2.0 Authentication specification

[Robert Yates]

On 5/18/07, Josh Hoyt <josh at janrain.com> wrote:
> I welcome specific suggestions for simplifying or otherwise improving
> the specification. The more feedback that we get, the better.

Sorry for the tardy response, but is the proposal to separate
discovery [1] still on the table? In scanning the mailing lists I see
recent references to it, but is it going to happen?  IMO, that would
simplify and improve the core spec.  It would also alleviate a lot of
the concerns as it places a lot of the optional / more complex aspects
of the spec i.e. i-names [2] off to a separate spec.

Rob

p.s. it isn't clear in the current spec that i-names support is
optional, the only reference I ever found that indicates this is the
posting from Dick [2] so at the very least that should be made
clearer.

[1] http://openid.net/pipermail/specs/2007-February/001316.html
[2] http://openid.net/pipermail/general/2007-February/001643.html