OpenID 1.2 Extensions Proposal

[Drummond Reed]

Gabe, thanks for weighing in.

Now, as healthy co-chairs often do (translate: it wouldn't be the first time
;-), I'm not sure I agree with Gabe's assessment.

Not about trying to avoid adding anything to XRI resolution (because I agree
strongly we need to complete the XRI 2.0 cycle). However upon consideration
I think a Requires element to express service dependencies is not something
specific to the Yadis use of XRDS, but is a generic requirement of Service
declarations for any usage context.

Thus I believe it *may* make sense for a Requires element to be declared in
the XRD namespace.

That said, if the XRI TC doesn't want to touch this namespace again in the
XRI 2.0 cycle but only consider it in a future version of the XRD namespace,
then Yadis could create the element in its own namespace and incorporate it
into Yadis 1.1. 

=Drummond 

-----Original Message-----
From: Wachob, Gabe [mailto:gwachob at visa.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 1:17 PM
To: Drummond Reed; Johannes Ernst
Cc: yadis at lists.danga.com
Subject: RE: OpenID 1.2 Extensions Proposal

I'm of the opinion that XRI resolution should stay where it is and not
add one more feature than it needs. 

This "requires" element seems like something which is layered on top of
XRI resolution (as are several other things) and therefore should be
defined outside it. 

In addition, its not clear to me that the requires semantics are very
general outside OpenID/Lid/YADIS (though I have not been following in
great detail) and therefore I'd say YADIS is where this element and its
use should be defined. In other words, I'm assuming that a
YADIS-specific implementation will deal with this element, so it should
be YADIS defining the element...

    -Gabe

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed at cordance.net] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 1:13 PM
> To: 'Johannes Ernst'
> Cc: yadis at lists.danga.com; Wachob, Gabe
> Subject: RE: OpenID 1.2 Extensions Proposal
> 
> Johannes, I *knew* you would be asking that ;-)
> 
> Answer: it is not in XRI Resolution 2.0 Working Draft 10. It 
> has come up in
> past discussions but no one on the TC had a particular use 
> case for it yet.
> 
> The TC is intentionally holding XRI Resolution 2.0 at the 
> Working Draft
> level until implementations are complete and interoperability has been
> tested. The rationale for doing this is primarily to catch 
> any bugs -- we
> don't intend to add any additional features at this point. 
> However if the
> Yadis community believes it is a compelling requirement for 
> XRDS, and as
> long as it didn't affect interoperability of anything in 
> Working Draft 10,
> we might consider it for Working Draft 11.
> 
> I'm copying Gabe to give him a heads up that it's "on radar" 
> and solicit his
> considered input.
> 
> =Drummond 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johannes Ernst [mailto:jernst+lists.danga.com at netmesh.us] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 12:55 PM
> To: Drummond Reed
> Cc: yadis at lists.danga.com; 'Wachob, Gabe'
> Subject: Re: OpenID 1.2 Extensions Proposal
> 
> 
> On Apr 5, 2006, at 12:47, Drummond Reed wrote:
> > ...For example, the
> > following is how you would express that OpenID 1.0 Extension A 1.0  
> > requires
> > OpenID Signon Service 1.2:
> >
> >    <Service priority="20">
> >      <Type> http://openid.net/extensions/A/1.0</Type>
> >      <URI>http://www.myopenid.com/server</URI>
> >      <Requires> http://openid.net/signon/1.2</Requires>
> >    </Service> ...
> 
> Drummond, is the <Requires/> an element that's defined anywhere in  
> the OASIS drafts right now, or would that be something we'd have to  
> put in a Yadis 1.1, or ...?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Johannes Ernst
> NetMesh Inc.
> 
> 
>