Suggested scoping for AX 2.0 WG

[Dick Hardt]

To be clear, what I have suggested is not the bulk exchange of multiple users. It is the method to treat number of attributes as a group that requires some integrity within them. When it comes to CX, by design, it does not do multi user exchane either since it requires the parties to explicitly sign the contract.


The advantage of keeping it in this WG is that we make sure that different approaches to handling exchange of user attributes are viewed by the same people, even if it ends up in a separate mini-spec.

The counter-argument is that most members of this WG are not interested primarily in this functionality, and it may distract both efforts (CX and AX), and that AX is unlikely to directly support anything along these lines.


I think that Nat’s description above is a general requirement and makes sense to be in scope.
To clarify, bulk movement of attributes from different users is not in scope – grouping attributes together would be in scope (I’m interested in this functionality)

Anyone have a concern with that?


-          Dick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs/attachments/20090204/3bd28d47/attachment-0001.htm>