Proposal (Was: When are and aren't two URLs the same?)

[Johannes Ernst]

In the example that I just gave (the part of my e-mail that you  
didn't quote), the user -- in this case, me -- got a weird error and  
could not log on. It required protocol-level debugging, and then code  
changes so the user could log on. This seems to qualify as a "case  
where this doesn't work"?


On Apr 24, 2006, at 10:11, Jonathan Daugherty wrote:

> # Now the argument can be made that this trivial transformation --
> # dropping redundant port 80 -- should be made by the identity host,
> # but unless we all agree what are and aren't allowed, encouraged, ..
> # transformations, that way lies interoperability hell.
>
> I don't see how this leads to interoperability problems.  If identity
> providers implement redirects to canonicalize URLs, then the
> "interoperability" problem goes away because a relying party will
> presumably follow those redirects.  Am I missing something?  Can you
> contrive a case where this doesn't work?
>
> -- 
>   Jonathan Daugherty
>   JanRain, Inc.

Johannes Ernst
NetMesh Inc.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lid.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 973 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.danga.com/pipermail/yadis/attachments/20060424/e15aceca/lid.gif
-------------- next part --------------
  http://netmesh.info/jernst