RFC: Final outstanding issues with the OpenID 2.0 Authenticationspecification

[Recordon, David]

I think in the past the idea was giving the HTML "form" element a
specific name in addition to the text field.  This thus makes it much
easier to detect.

--David 

-----Original Message-----
From: specs-bounces at openid.net [mailto:specs-bounces at openid.net] On
Behalf Of Dmitry Shechtman
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:47 AM
To: 'Boris Erdmann'; 'Josh Hoyt'
Cc: 'OpenID specs list'
Subject: RE: RFC: Final outstanding issues with the OpenID 2.0
Authenticationspecification

> As of today browsers are forced to make untenable assumptions to 
> detect OPs or RPs. Read
> http://openid.net/specs/openid-authentication-2_0-11.html#initiation:
> "The form field's "name" attribute SHOULD have the value 
> "openid_identifier" is the only point for a browser to grip the 
> protocol. (And the field name is different from OpenID1.x)

Indeed. Here's a suggestion that floated during that talk.


The form field:

a. SHOULD have "openid_identifier" as its "name" attribute's value, b.
MUST have "openid" as a substring its "name" attribute's value and c.
SHOULD be the only field in the entire document to satisfy (b).


Regards,
Dmitry
=damnian

_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
specs at openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs