Oh good... either no one has read this or had time enough to respond
back regarding using <a href="http://openid.name">openid.name</a> to register temporary users which I
suddenly realised why brewing a new pot of coffee would be a great way
to become the object of everyones affefction by opening the door to the
comment spammers.<br>
<br>
Please disregard that portion of my last response. That DEFINITELY WILL NOT be what that domain would be used for. :D<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/30/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">M. David Peterson</b> <
<a href="mailto:xmlhacker@gmail.com">xmlhacker@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">I agree David. This is without a doubt a system that will quickly
rid itself of those who bend too often, stretch too far, or purposely
will ill intent break the moral code that, if not literally specified
as part of the specification, we all obviously know they exist and when
they've been broken. With the added element of having the ability
to deligate to a new verification server then the concern of "losing
one identity" goes away (who's specific idea/addition was this one...
Genius. Shear and Remarkable Genius!).<br>
<br>
With this in place the offenders will have no where to run and with
options as to "where to validate now?" then this opens the possibility
that one can realistically feel confident in sharing personal
information in confidence to then share it with those you choose and
only those you choose.<br>
<br>
This also brings us back to the possible usage of the <a href="http://openid.name" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">openid.name</a>
domain to be used for a variety of purposes, one of them could be as an
interface to develop, update, and add or change permissions. If I
remember correctly the concern with the usage of this domain was the
connection to the openid identity when the focus of the project was to
discourage anything that remotely resembled this scenario. But if
a delegate became a required aspect of anyone using this domain to
create an identity to act as a delegate as well as to securely manage
your FOAF profile then it seems the original concerns are easily
overcome.<br>
<br>
If the domain were transfered to Brad or whomever is overseeing the
.org side of things and then those who had interest in hosting an
instance of this domain simply requested a thrid-tier domain (e.g.
<a href="http://cxml.openid.name/user" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">cxml.openid.name/user</a> for members of the ChannelXML project) and, if
available, would be given usage of this domain as long as they agreed
to a much more strict set of guidelines such as those specific to the
abuse of a users FOAF file, etc....)<br>
<br>
At present time I had plans to simply use this domain as a
demonstration server where potential "customers" could register
temporary user names to then use throughout the system to test things
to see how and if it works to then list all available service providers
in which they could gain service from if they were to "like what they
saw".<br>
<br>
Again, I simply want to help promote this project and I believe this is
one way that could really do a great job of that. But if this is
still seen as something that gains no real benefit while causing too
much confusion then I have no plans to push this any further...
Just want to help where and if I can :D<br>
<br>
Cheers :)<div><span class="e" id="q_104cc089f419a797_1"><br>
<br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/29/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">David Recordon</b> <<a href="mailto:david@sixapart.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">david@sixapart.com
</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
That is true, but removing it from your FOAF file doesn't mean servers won't<br>have stored it, let alone if they had that they will delete it. By including<br>it as part of the spec then at least servers that play well with others will
<br>give users this control. Those that don't, I'd assume would be outed and<br>banned by consumers.<br><br>--David<br><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Kristopher Tate<br>Sent: Thu 6/30/2005 1:30 AM<br><br>The problem with this is that once a server has it -- it has it. there
<br>is no control over it. once it's out there, it's gone<br><br></blockquote></div><br><br><br></span></div><span class="sg">-- <br><M:D/><br><br>M. David Peterson<br>[ <a href="http://www.xsltblog.com/" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.xsltblog.com/</a> ][ <a href="http://www.xmlblogs.net" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.xmlblogs.net</a> ]
</span></blockquote></div><br><br><br>-- <br><M:D/><br><br>M. David Peterson<br>[ <a href="http://www.xsltblog.com/">http://www.xsltblog.com/</a> ][ <a href="http://www.xmlblogs.net">http://www.xmlblogs.net</a> ]