Version Handling [ was OpenID status update ]

[Paul Crowley]

Ben Hyde wrote:
> The following is a brutal peice of cherry picking from various 
> responses. 

I totally approve.

>   1) sadly fail if you get openid.* parameters you don't comprehend.  [ 
> my prefence]
>   2) happily ignore openid.* parameters you don't comprehend.

You are very right that this must be made explicit.  I favour 1, though.

Actually there's a case to be made that servers should do 2 and 
consumers should do 1.  The party making the request can do nothing 
about the capabilities of the recipient, so has to beef up their request 
with everything that any receipient might want; the party making the 
reply knows enough to know what the client can accept, and so should 
only include a field if the client MUST accept it.

That's probably too complex though.  I favour 1.  Servers can be smart 
about what they send.

> I'd like to see an integer added.

I favour this too, now.  I'll add it to the spec.  Where does it go?
-- 
   __
\/ o\ Paul Crowley, paul at ciphergoth.org
/\__/ http://www.ciphergoth.org/