Yadis Spec .9 Change Proposal: Section 7.3.1 clarify multiple XRD

[Larry Drebes]

I think we should take a position.  It is worthwhile to have all 
implementations do the same thing when presented a document containing 
multiple <XRD> elements.   I believe the strategy of ignoring all <XRD> 
elements except the last came from Drummond's post 
http://lists.danga.com/pipermail/yadis/2005-December/001886.html .

If this is the correct behavior (Drummond?), then I think we need a 
wording change.

larry-


Johannes Ernst wrote:
> Are we certain that we want to have a position on this issue at all?
>
> The way your change request sounds is that different compliant 
> implementations can choose data from different sections (e.g. if there 
> is a higher-priority element in a non-last XRD), I don't think that is 
> what we mean.
>
> What we have so far is unambigious, but on further reflection, maybe 
> we should not take a position.
>
> On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:14, Larry Drebes wrote:
>
>> In section 7.3.1
>>
>> The sentence
>>
>> If a YADIS XRDS includes more than one XRD element, a Relying Party 
>> Agent MUST examine at least the last XRD element.
>>
>> should be replaced with
>>
>> If a YADIS XRDS includes more than one XRD element, the YADIS 
>> Resource Descriptor is the last XRD element. Other <XRD> elements are 
>> ignored.
>
> Johannes Ernst
> NetMesh Inc.
>
>  http://netmesh.info/jernst
>