Re: [xri] XRI Resolution 2.0 Comittee Spec Proposal

["Markus Sabadello" <markus.sabadello@xdi.org>]

It's a bit sad that (currently) XRI is mostly reduced to its OpenID role.
Anyway, once this draft is done, we will make OpenXRI conform to it as fast as possible..

-Markus

On 5/18/07, Schleiff, Marty <marty.schleiff@boeing.com> wrote:

+1

 

Marty.Schleiff@boeing.com ; CISSP
Associate Technical Fellow - Cyber Identity Specialist
Computing Security Infrastructure
(206) 679-5933

 

---

From: Nat Sakimura [mailto:n-sakimura@nri.co.jp]
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 3:07 PM
To: 'Gabe Wachob'; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [xri] XRI Resolution 2.0 Comittee Spec Proposal

I was there at IIW and I do agree with Gabe.

 

We need to bake it now.

 

Nat

---

From: Gabe Wachob [mailto:gabe.wachob@amsoft.net]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 6:20 AM
To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xri] XRI Resolution 2.0 Comittee Spec Proposal

A number of us had a conversation at IIW this week about the progress on XRI specs, and the fact that OpenID 2.0 is, in part, waiting on XRI specs to become citeable (ie not draft stage).

 

Drummond and I (and several others at the table) agreed that we should promote XRI Res 2.0 wd 11 (or something soon after) to a committee spec so that the openid community can reference it. The intent here is to document what is essentially already being used in the wild, based on our earlier drafts and with a very few additional proposals that have come up from experience in the wild.

 

If we don't approve XRI Res 2.0 as a committee spec, I am almost certain XRI will be pulled out of OpenID core specifications. I can't guarantee that it won't anyway, but I think it's really up to us to put up now and produce a committee spec that can actually be cited.

 

We have to be disciplined on our goal with this release, and need to be guided primarily by OpenID adoption concerns. because any substantive changes to openid implementations (that aren't driven by OpenID needs) are going to be rejected by the OpenID community at this point.

 

In addition, there was discussion as well on continuing the work beyond 2.0, of course. The proposal was made to call this work 3.0 ¨C something I would endorse. This is a separate topic that can be discussed later.

 

            -Gabe