I agree the implementations will help prove this out. I'd put it the other way though..rather than check the mistakes after we write the spec, let's examine the mistake list now
and design the spec from the get-go to avoid these mistakes as one of our core requirements for XDI. Fixing it in retrospective, if we compare the spec against the mistake list afterward, may present problems.
Kind regards,
Bill Barnhill
Booz Allen Hamilton - Belcamp,MD
From: markus.sabadello@gmail.com [markus.sabadello@gmail.com] on behalf of Markus Sabadello [markus.sabadello@xdi.org]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 2:41 PM
To: Barnhill, William [USA]
Cc: OASIS - XDI TC
Subject: Re: [xdi] Applying Interoperability Guidelines to XDI
This looks really useful..
I assume that as soon as we start comparing our different implementations, we will probably run into some of these mistakes quickly.
Especially mistake #2 looks relevant at this point :)
Anyway, I'm really excited about getting the server going, that should help with interoperability I think..
And yes when we have an actual spec, we should check each mistake to be sure we didn't make it.
Markus
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Barnhill, William [USA]
<barnhill_william@bah.com> wrote:
I recommend we all look closely at the interoperability guidelines recently released by OASIS, linked below. In my opinion we should be clearly and definitively able to explain how we did not
make each of the mistakes described in this document. I'm not certain that we could do that presently, but the spec is still being formed.
Yes definitely, I had the same thought.. :)
In light of last call's discussion on what's the "approved" version of XDI and how to "make progress", I agree the server should also be used to explain what documents/drafts/etc each implementation is actually based on.
And yes, test suites should also go there...
Markus
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Michael Schwartz
<mike@gluu.org> wrote:
Great news! Thanks Markus!
Perhaps we can use this server to post an official XDI test suite. This is relevant to the current discussion, and would enable the TC to clearly understand the current state of the existing servers.
- Mike
On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Drummond Reed wrote:
Dee,
Thanks, that's great news.
Markus, since you are the primary on this, can you fill out the details in
this contract template, including Schedule A (which I think you can base
almost entirely on the wiki page describing the project).
Once you are done, email your draft back to Dee plus Bill and I so we can
review it.
Thanks,
=Drummond
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Dee Schur <dee.schur@oasis-open.org> wrote:
Hi Markus and Michael,
We got approval from the StC for the latest XDI proposal,
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/idtrust-sc/ballot.php?id=2200&r
eferring_url=%2Fkws
Please see the attached contract and please complete Schedule A - this is
the most important piece. Also, since this contract is to go to December
2012, please specify a review period by the StC at around August.
Scott,
Have I overlooked anything?
Thanks,
dee
Dee Schur
Senior Manager - Standards Advocate
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org
+1.781.425.5073 x211
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
xdi-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
xdi-help@lists.oasis-open.org
|