Re: [xri] <Link> Semantics

[George Fletcher <george.fletcher@corp.aol.com>]

Yes, I think you've answered the questions.  No need to read further:)

Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
>
>
> On 3/17/09 1:08 PM, "George Fletcher" <george.fletcher@corp.aol.com> 
> wrote:
>
> > But given that not every 2.0 provider is also a 1.1 provider, I can see
> > the case where I might want to have both a 1.1 provider and a 2.0
> > provider and they could be different. Albeit not very likely in the
> > currently climate where most users will just use the OpenID provided by
> > the major provider they already use.
>
> But my approach doesn't stop you from listing two providers and 
> putting them
> in order of preference. One will support 2.0 and the other 1.1. The RP 
> will
> choose the best one for its needs. Why do *you* need to specify which one
> supports which version? I think in the balance between your (the user) 
> ease
> of use and the RP's potential (if no caching) extra round trip, you should
> win.
>
Actually, I misunderstood what you were proposing and completely agree 
with you. I just wanted to make sure that both links could be specified.
>
>
> > However, based on your most resent response to Drummond, if we optimize
> > the purist form for the pragmatic form, then extensions are defined by
> > <Rel> elements which could be included in the <Link> element in the
> > user's XRD. I agree that most users won't see or have control over this
> > data as it will be provisioned by the OP in the user's XRD (in most 
> cases).
>
> The problem with this approach is that it treats any user not using 
> the URI
> provided by the IDP as its OpenID URI as second class citizens. Yes, it
> removes one roundtrip, but at a price that a this point I doubt the OpenID
> community is willing to pay.
>
I'm a little confused here. For the user who wants to use a "vanity" 
OpenID (as Martin likes to call them) they can build their own XRD and 
include whatever information they want in regards to the OP they link 
to. So I don't see how anything specified here precludes a user having 
their own OpenID. I this we agree that most people will use an OpenID 
provided by a major provider and in that case, the information in the 
XRD will be put there by the OP.
>
>
> Personally, I could not care less. If I used OpenID, it would be from a
> large provider that will manage everything for me. But this is where 
> we (the
> XRI committee) cannot go any further as we are not in charge of 
> prioritizing
> the OpenID requirements...
>
> My question is, did I answer in my last two posts about this the 
> question on
> how OpenID *can* use XRD for discovery?
>
> EHL
>
Thanks,
George