<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>Whether it really is legally binding depends on what jurisdiction you are in, but typically there are some minimal set of info that has to be included to be considered to be a good one. Namely, sufficiently unique identifiers for all the parties involved, term, date, expiry, renewal privision, termination clause, jurisdiction, and signatures. Signature sometimes is of not the subject but of a proxy agent. </div><div>CX is going to define how these should be represented. </div><div><br></div><div>These "contracts" typically lives long, and there are readability requirement as well. (I.e. it should not require a special software to read and understand what it means.) Cryptographically, it requires provisioning against algorithm getting compromised such as time stamping. </div><div><br></div><div>We also have to define the verification procedure for all the above. </div><div><br></div><div>Then, there is an issue of what entails the reasonable action and workflow etc. as a proof of user consent. </div><div><br></div><div>So, in summary, while we intend to use AX (and/or OAuth hybrid) as the undelying protocol, it is a little more than merely defining another set of attributes. </div><div><br>=nat<span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.231373); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.231373); ">@TOKYO via iPhone</span></div><div><br>On 2009/01/23, at 5:43, Allen Tom <<a href="mailto:atom@yahoo-inc.com">atom@yahoo-inc.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
Hi Nat,<br>
<br>
Can you define the term "contract"? Is it legally binding? It is just a
signed set of attributes? Who are the parties involved with signing the
contract? The RP, OP, and user? Instead of defining a new CX extension,
would it just be sufficient to define new attributes using AX?<br>
<br>
Would it make more sense to use OAuth instead of defining a new OpenID
extension? OAuth is designed to allow a user to authorize an RP (aka
Consumer) to access protected resources hosted by the user's OP (aka
Service Provider). It might make more sense to use the OpenID+OAuth
hybrid protocol along with an OAuth protected web service to exchange
contract information.<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
Allen<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Nat Sakimura wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:bf26e2340901130123v2227546xd73b629898e8ed90@mail.gmail.com" type="cite">I have edited the Contract Exchange Proposal on the wiki. <br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1"><a href="http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1">http://wiki.openid.net/Working_Groups%3AContract_Exchange_1</a></a><br>
<br>
It is substantially shorter and easier to parse, hopefully. <br>
<br>
Please discuss. <br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Nat Sakimura (=nat)<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.sakimura.org/en/"><a href="http://www.sakimura.org/en/">http://www.sakimura.org/en/</a></a><br>
<pre wrap=""><hr size="4" width="90%">
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:specs@openid.net"><a href="mailto:specs@openid.net">specs@openid.net</a></a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs"><a href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs</a></a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></blockquote></body></html>