Per the OpenID Foundation IPR policies and procedures, this note formally
proposes the formation of a new OpenID working group. The charter and
background information for the proposed group are as follows.

(a) Charter.
(i) WG name: OpenID v.Next Discovery.
(ii) Purpose: Produce a discovery specification or family of discovery
specifications for OpenID v.Next that address the limitations and drawbacks
present in the OpenID 2.0 discovery facilities that limit OpenID?s
applicability, adoption, usability, privacy, and security. Specific goals
are:
? enable discovery for and normalization of OpenID identifiers,
including those utilizing e-mail address syntax and those that are URLs,

? enable discovery of features supported by OpenID v.Next OpenID
Providers and Relying Parties,

? enable discovery of attributes about OpenID v.Next OPs and RPs,
including, but not limited to visual logos and human-readable site names,

? enable discovery supporting a spectrum of clients, including passive
clients per current usage, thin active clients, and active clients with OP
functionality,

? enable discovery supporting authentication to and use of attributes
by non-browser applications,

? enable discovery of public keys,

? enable potential mechanisms for discovering context-relevant OpenID
providers,

? seamlessly integrate with and complement the other OpenID v.Next
specifications.

Compatibility with OpenID 2.0 is an explicit non-goal for this
work.
(iii) Scope: Produce a next generation OpenID discovery specification or
specifications, consistent with the purpose statement.
(iv) Proposed List of Specifications: OpenID v.Next Discovery and
possibly related specifications.
(v) Anticipated audience or users of the work: Implementers of OpenID
Providers, Relying Parties, Active Clients, and non-browser applications
utilizing OpenID.
(vi) Language in which the WG will conduct business: English.
(vii) Method of work: E-mail discussions on the working group mailing
list, working group conference calls, and face-to-face meetings at the
Internet Identity Workshop and OpenID summits.
(viii) Basis for determining when the work of the WG is completed: Work
will not be deemed to be complete until there is a consensus that the
resulting protocol specification or family of specifications fulfills the
working group goals. Additional proposed changes beyond that initial
consensus will be evaluated on the basis of whether they increase or
decrease consensus within the working group. The work will be completed
once it is apparent that maximal consensus on the draft has been achieved,
consistent with the purpose and scope.
(b) Background Information.
(i) Related work being done in other WGs or organizations: OpenID
Authentication 2.0 and related specifications, including Yadis 1.0. OAuth
and OAuth 2.0. XRDS, XRD, host-meta, Web Linking, XAuth, LRDD, and
WebFinger.
(ii) Proposers:
Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100521/95fa7a7e/attachment.html>

Search Discussions

  • Allen Tom at May 22, 2010 at 2:28 am
    Hi All,

    Regarding all the various WG proposals ? at least with the Discovery WG, I
    think there?s universal consensus that the existing OpenID 2.0 discovery
    mechanism is very deficient and must be revised or even completely
    replaced. Yadis is obsolete and overly complex, and there?s been a lot of
    innovation in Discovery after OpenID 2.0 was finalized.

    The authors of the OpenID User Interface extension found several cases where
    OpenID discovery needed to be updated, yet extending the existing 2.0
    discovery did not quite work. (RP/OP Logos/Metadata, publishing which UI
    modes and display languages were supported, support for browser assistants,
    etc)

    The Discovery WG charter is well defined and focused ? the output of the WG
    is expected to be usable for future iterations of OpenID. Given that the
    community wants to quickly advance OpenID, my hope is that the future
    discovery work can be developed in parallel and kept in sync with the other
    initiatives.

    Allen

    On 5/21/10 6:05 PM, "Allen Tom" wrote:

    Per the OpenID Foundation IPR policies and procedures, this note formally
    proposes the formation of a new OpenID working group. The charter and
    background information for the proposed group are as follows.

    (a) Charter.
    (i) WG name: OpenID v.Next Discovery.
    (ii) Purpose: Produce a discovery specification or family of discovery
    specifications for OpenID v.Next that address the limitations and drawbacks
    present in the OpenID 2.0 discovery facilities that limit OpenID?s
    applicability, adoption, usability, privacy, and security. Specific goals
    are:
    ? enable discovery for and normalization of OpenID identifiers, including
    those utilizing e-mail address syntax and those that are URLs,

    ? enable discovery of features supported by OpenID v.Next OpenID
    Providers and Relying Parties,

    ? enable discovery of attributes about OpenID v.Next OPs and RPs,
    including, but not limited to visual logos and human-readable site names,

    ? enable discovery supporting a spectrum of clients, including passive
    clients per current usage, thin active clients, and active clients with OP
    functionality,

    ? enable discovery supporting authentication to and use of attributes by
    non-browser applications,

    ? enable discovery of public keys,

    ? enable potential mechanisms for discovering context-relevant OpenID
    providers,

    ? seamlessly integrate with and complement the other OpenID v.Next
    specifications.

    Compatibility with OpenID 2.0 is an explicit non-goal for this
    work.
    (iii) Scope: Produce a next generation OpenID discovery specification or
    specifications, consistent with the purpose statement.
    (iv) Proposed List of Specifications: OpenID v.Next Discovery and
    possibly related specifications.
    (v) Anticipated audience or users of the work: Implementers of OpenID
    Providers, Relying Parties, Active Clients, and non-browser applications
    utilizing OpenID.
    (vi) Language in which the WG will conduct business: English.
    (vii) Method of work: E-mail discussions on the working group mailing
    list, working group conference calls, and face-to-face meetings at the
    Internet Identity Workshop and OpenID summits.
    (viii) Basis for determining when the work of the WG is completed: Work
    will not be deemed to be complete until there is a consensus that the
    resulting protocol specification or family of specifications fulfills the
    working group goals. Additional proposed changes beyond that initial
    consensus will be evaluated on the basis of whether they increase or decrease
    consensus within the working group. The work will be completed once it is
    apparent that maximal consensus on the draft has been achieved, consistent
    with the purpose and scope.
    (b) Background Information.
    (i) Related work being done in other WGs or organizations: OpenID
    Authentication 2.0 and related specifications, including Yadis 1.0. OAuth and
    OAuth 2.0. XRDS, XRD, host-meta, Web Linking, XAuth, LRDD, and WebFinger.
    (ii) Proposers:
    Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
    Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
    John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
    Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100521/0ed42545/attachment.html>
  • Breno de Medeiros at May 22, 2010 at 2:58 am
    Agreed.

    While it's clear that other WGs might have to coordinate with the
    discovery WG, I think there's value in having a separate discovery WG
    for the reasons you mention.
    On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 19:28, Allen Tom wrote:
    Hi All,

    Regarding all the various WG proposals ? at least with the Discovery WG, I
    think there?s universal consensus that the existing OpenID 2.0 discovery
    mechanism is very deficient and ?must be revised or even completely
    replaced. Yadis is obsolete and overly complex, and there?s been a lot of
    innovation in Discovery after OpenID 2.0 was finalized.

    The authors of the OpenID User Interface extension found several cases where
    OpenID discovery needed to be updated, yet extending the existing 2.0
    discovery did not quite work. (RP/OP Logos/Metadata, publishing which UI
    modes and display languages were supported, support for browser assistants,
    etc)

    The Discovery WG charter is well defined and ?focused ? the output of the WG
    is expected to be usable for future iterations of OpenID. Given that the
    community wants to quickly advance OpenID, my hope is that the future
    discovery work can be developed in parallel and kept in sync with the other
    initiatives.

    Allen


    On 5/21/10 6:05 PM, "Allen Tom" wrote:

    Per the OpenID Foundation IPR policies and procedures, this note formally
    proposes the formation of a new OpenID working group. ?The charter and
    background information for the proposed group are as follows.

    (a) ?Charter.
    (i) ??????WG name: ?OpenID v.Next Discovery.
    (ii) ?????Purpose: Produce a discovery specification or family of discovery
    specifications for OpenID v.Next that address the limitations and drawbacks
    present in the OpenID 2.0 discovery facilities that limit OpenID?s
    applicability, adoption, usability, privacy, and security. ?Specific goals
    are:
    ? ????enable discovery for and normalization of OpenID identifiers,
    including those utilizing e-mail address syntax and those that are URLs,

    ? ????enable discovery of features supported by OpenID v.Next OpenID
    Providers and Relying Parties,

    ? ????enable discovery of attributes about OpenID v.Next OPs and RPs,
    including, but not limited to visual logos and human-readable site names,

    ? ????enable discovery supporting a spectrum of clients, including passive
    clients per current usage, thin active clients, and active clients with OP
    functionality,

    ? ????enable discovery supporting authentication to and use of attributes by
    non-browser applications,

    ? ????enable discovery of public keys,

    ? ????enable potential mechanisms for discovering context-relevant OpenID
    providers,

    ? ????seamlessly integrate with and complement the other OpenID v.Next
    specifications.

    ???????????Compatibility with OpenID 2.0 is an explicit non-goal for this
    work.
    (iii) ????Scope: Produce a next generation OpenID discovery specification or
    specifications, consistent with the purpose statement.
    (iv) ????Proposed List of Specifications: ?OpenID v.Next Discovery and
    possibly related specifications.
    (v) ?????Anticipated audience or users of the work: ?Implementers of OpenID
    Providers, Relying Parties, Active Clients, and non-browser applications
    utilizing OpenID.
    (vi) ????Language in which the WG will conduct business: ?English.
    (vii) ???Method of work: ?E-mail discussions on the working group mailing
    list, working group conference calls, and face-to-face meetings at the
    Internet Identity Workshop and OpenID summits.
    (viii) ??Basis for determining when the work of the WG is completed: ?Work
    will not be deemed to be complete until there is a consensus that the
    resulting protocol specification or family of specifications fulfills the
    working group goals. ?Additional proposed changes beyond that initial
    consensus will be evaluated on the basis of whether they increase or
    decrease consensus within the working group. ?The work will be completed
    once it is apparent that maximal consensus on the draft has been achieved,
    consistent with the purpose and scope.
    (b) ?Background Information.
    (i) ??????Related work being done in other WGs or organizations: ?OpenID
    Authentication 2.0 and related specifications, including Yadis 1.0. ?OAuth
    and OAuth 2.0. ?XRDS, XRD, host-meta, Web Linking, XAuth, LRDD, and
    WebFinger.
    (ii) ?????Proposers:
    Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
    Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
    John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
    Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent


    --
    --Breno

    +1 (650) 214-1007 desk
    +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
    MTV-41-3 : 383-A
    PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
  • John Bradley at May 22, 2010 at 5:11 am
    Agreed,

    Once the charter is approved lets get this party started.

    John B.
    On 2010-05-21, at 7:58 PM, Breno de Medeiros wrote:

    Agreed.

    While it's clear that other WGs might have to coordinate with the
    discovery WG, I think there's value in having a separate discovery WG
    for the reasons you mention.
    On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 19:28, Allen Tom wrote:
    Hi All,

    Regarding all the various WG proposals ? at least with the Discovery WG, I
    think there?s universal consensus that the existing OpenID 2.0 discovery
    mechanism is very deficient and must be revised or even completely
    replaced. Yadis is obsolete and overly complex, and there?s been a lot of
    innovation in Discovery after OpenID 2.0 was finalized.

    The authors of the OpenID User Interface extension found several cases where
    OpenID discovery needed to be updated, yet extending the existing 2.0
    discovery did not quite work. (RP/OP Logos/Metadata, publishing which UI
    modes and display languages were supported, support for browser assistants,
    etc)

    The Discovery WG charter is well defined and focused ? the output of the WG
    is expected to be usable for future iterations of OpenID. Given that the
    community wants to quickly advance OpenID, my hope is that the future
    discovery work can be developed in parallel and kept in sync with the other
    initiatives.

    Allen


    On 5/21/10 6:05 PM, "Allen Tom" wrote:

    Per the OpenID Foundation IPR policies and procedures, this note formally
    proposes the formation of a new OpenID working group. The charter and
    background information for the proposed group are as follows.

    (a) Charter.
    (i) WG name: OpenID v.Next Discovery.
    (ii) Purpose: Produce a discovery specification or family of discovery
    specifications for OpenID v.Next that address the limitations and drawbacks
    present in the OpenID 2.0 discovery facilities that limit OpenID?s
    applicability, adoption, usability, privacy, and security. Specific goals
    are:
    ? enable discovery for and normalization of OpenID identifiers,
    including those utilizing e-mail address syntax and those that are URLs,

    ? enable discovery of features supported by OpenID v.Next OpenID
    Providers and Relying Parties,

    ? enable discovery of attributes about OpenID v.Next OPs and RPs,
    including, but not limited to visual logos and human-readable site names,

    ? enable discovery supporting a spectrum of clients, including passive
    clients per current usage, thin active clients, and active clients with OP
    functionality,

    ? enable discovery supporting authentication to and use of attributes by
    non-browser applications,

    ? enable discovery of public keys,

    ? enable potential mechanisms for discovering context-relevant OpenID
    providers,

    ? seamlessly integrate with and complement the other OpenID v.Next
    specifications.

    Compatibility with OpenID 2.0 is an explicit non-goal for this
    work.
    (iii) Scope: Produce a next generation OpenID discovery specification or
    specifications, consistent with the purpose statement.
    (iv) Proposed List of Specifications: OpenID v.Next Discovery and
    possibly related specifications.
    (v) Anticipated audience or users of the work: Implementers of OpenID
    Providers, Relying Parties, Active Clients, and non-browser applications
    utilizing OpenID.
    (vi) Language in which the WG will conduct business: English.
    (vii) Method of work: E-mail discussions on the working group mailing
    list, working group conference calls, and face-to-face meetings at the
    Internet Identity Workshop and OpenID summits.
    (viii) Basis for determining when the work of the WG is completed: Work
    will not be deemed to be complete until there is a consensus that the
    resulting protocol specification or family of specifications fulfills the
    working group goals. Additional proposed changes beyond that initial
    consensus will be evaluated on the basis of whether they increase or
    decrease consensus within the working group. The work will be completed
    once it is apparent that maximal consensus on the draft has been achieved,
    consistent with the purpose and scope.
    (b) Background Information.
    (i) Related work being done in other WGs or organizations: OpenID
    Authentication 2.0 and related specifications, including Yadis 1.0. OAuth
    and OAuth 2.0. XRDS, XRD, host-meta, Web Linking, XAuth, LRDD, and
    WebFinger.
    (ii) Proposers:
    Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
    Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
    John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
    Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent


    --
    --Breno

    +1 (650) 214-1007 desk
    +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
    MTV-41-3 : 383-A
    PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
    -------------- next part --------------
    A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
    Name: smime.p7s
    Type: application/pkcs7-signature
    Size: 4767 bytes
    Desc: not available
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100521/a7aa308d/attachment.bin>
  • Nat at May 22, 2010 at 3:40 pm
    Yes. Let us go.

    =nat @ Mountain View via iPhone
    On 2010/05/22, at 14:11, John Bradley wrote:

    Agreed,

    Once the charter is approved lets get this party started.

    John B.
    On 2010-05-21, at 7:58 PM, Breno de Medeiros wrote:

    Agreed.

    While it's clear that other WGs might have to coordinate with the
    discovery WG, I think there's value in having a separate discovery WG
    for the reasons you mention.
    On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 19:28, Allen Tom wrote:
    Hi All,

    Regarding all the various WG proposals ? at least with the Disco
    very WG, I
    think there?s universal consensus that the existing OpenID 2.0 d
    iscovery
    mechanism is very deficient and must be revised or even completely
    replaced. Yadis is obsolete and overly complex, and there?s been
    a lot of
    innovation in Discovery after OpenID 2.0 was finalized.

    The authors of the OpenID User Interface extension found several
    cases where
    OpenID discovery needed to be updated, yet extending the existing
    2.0
    discovery did not quite work. (RP/OP Logos/Metadata, publishing
    which UI
    modes and display languages were supported, support for browser
    assistants,
    etc)

    The Discovery WG charter is well defined and focused ? the outp
    ut of the WG
    is expected to be usable for future iterations of OpenID. Given
    that the
    community wants to quickly advance OpenID, my hope is that the
    future
    discovery work can be developed in parallel and kept in sync with
    the other
    initiatives.

    Allen


    On 5/21/10 6:05 PM, "Allen Tom" wrote:

    Per the OpenID Foundation IPR policies and procedures, this note
    formally
    proposes the formation of a new OpenID working group. The charter
    and
    background information for the proposed group are as follows.

    (a) Charter.
    (i) WG name: OpenID v.Next Discovery.
    (ii) Purpose: Produce a discovery specification or family of
    discovery
    specifications for OpenID v.Next that address the limitations and
    drawbacks
    present in the OpenID 2.0 discovery facilities that limit OpenID?s
    applicability, adoption, usability, privacy, and security.
    Specific goals
    are:
    ? enable discovery for and normalization of OpenID identifiers,
    including those utilizing e-mail address syntax and those that are
    URLs,

    ? enable discovery of features supported by OpenID v.Next Op
    enID
    Providers and Relying Parties,

    ? enable discovery of attributes about OpenID v.Next OPs and
    RPs,
    including, but not limited to visual logos and human-readable site
    names,

    ? enable discovery supporting a spectrum of clients, includi
    ng passive
    clients per current usage, thin active clients, and active clients
    with OP
    functionality,

    ? enable discovery supporting authentication to and use of a
    ttributes by
    non-browser applications,

    ? enable discovery of public keys,

    ? enable potential mechanisms for discovering context-releva
    nt OpenID
    providers,

    ? seamlessly integrate with and complement the other OpenID
    v.Next
    specifications.

    Compatibility with OpenID 2.0 is an explicit non-goal
    for this
    work.
    (iii) Scope: Produce a next generation OpenID discovery
    specification or
    specifications, consistent with the purpose statement.
    (iv) Proposed List of Specifications: OpenID v.Next Discovery
    and
    possibly related specifications.
    (v) Anticipated audience or users of the work: Implementers
    of OpenID
    Providers, Relying Parties, Active Clients, and non-browser
    applications
    utilizing OpenID.
    (vi) Language in which the WG will conduct business: English.
    (vii) Method of work: E-mail discussions on the working group
    mailing
    list, working group conference calls, and face-to-face meetings at
    the
    Internet Identity Workshop and OpenID summits.
    (viii) Basis for determining when the work of the WG is
    completed: Work
    will not be deemed to be complete until there is a consensus that
    the
    resulting protocol specification or family of specifications
    fulfills the
    working group goals. Additional proposed changes beyond that
    initial
    consensus will be evaluated on the basis of whether they increase or
    decrease consensus within the working group. The work will be
    completed
    once it is apparent that maximal consensus on the draft has been
    achieved,
    consistent with the purpose and scope.
    (b) Background Information.
    (i) Related work being done in other WGs or organizations:
    OpenID
    Authentication 2.0 and related specifications, including Yadis
    1.0. OAuth
    and OAuth 2.0. XRDS, XRD, host-meta, Web Linking, XAuth, LRDD, and
    WebFinger.
    (ii) Proposers:
    Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
    Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
    John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
    Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent


    --
    --Breno

    +1 (650) 214-1007 desk
    +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
    MTV-41-3 : 383-A
    PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)
  • Nat Sakimura at May 24, 2010 at 2:50 am
    ditto.

    I've long been arguing that current OpenID 2.0 Discovery portion of the
    spec has "bugs".

    Let us get started.

    Allen, if you do not mind, please add me to the list of proposers as well.

    =nat

    (2010/05/22 14:11), John Bradley wrote:
    Agreed,

    Once the charter is approved lets get this party started.

    John B.
    On 2010-05-21, at 7:58 PM, Breno de Medeiros wrote:

    Agreed.

    While it's clear that other WGs might have to coordinate with the
    discovery WG, I think there's value in having a separate discovery WG
    for the reasons you mention.

    On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 19:28, Allen Tomwrote:
    Hi All,

    Regarding all the various WG proposals ? at least with the Discovery WG, I
    think there?s universal consensus that the existing OpenID 2.0 discovery
    mechanism is very deficient and must be revised or even completely
    replaced. Yadis is obsolete and overly complex, and there?s been a lot of
    innovation in Discovery after OpenID 2.0 was finalized.

    The authors of the OpenID User Interface extension found several cases where
    OpenID discovery needed to be updated, yet extending the existing 2.0
    discovery did not quite work. (RP/OP Logos/Metadata, publishing which UI
    modes and display languages were supported, support for browser assistants,
    etc)

    The Discovery WG charter is well defined and focused ? the output of the WG
    is expected to be usable for future iterations of OpenID. Given that the
    community wants to quickly advance OpenID, my hope is that the future
    discovery work can be developed in parallel and kept in sync with the other
    initiatives.

    Allen


    On 5/21/10 6:05 PM, "Allen Tom"wrote:

    Per the OpenID Foundation IPR policies and procedures, this note formally
    proposes the formation of a new OpenID working group. The charter and
    background information for the proposed group are as follows.

    (a) Charter.
    (i) WG name: OpenID v.Next Discovery.
    (ii) Purpose: Produce a discovery specification or family of discovery
    specifications for OpenID v.Next that address the limitations and drawbacks
    present in the OpenID 2.0 discovery facilities that limit OpenID?s
    applicability, adoption, usability, privacy, and security. Specific goals
    are:
    ? enable discovery for and normalization of OpenID identifiers,
    including those utilizing e-mail address syntax and those that are URLs,

    ? enable discovery of features supported by OpenID v.Next OpenID
    Providers and Relying Parties,

    ? enable discovery of attributes about OpenID v.Next OPs and RPs,
    including, but not limited to visual logos and human-readable site names,

    ? enable discovery supporting a spectrum of clients, including passive
    clients per current usage, thin active clients, and active clients with OP
    functionality,

    ? enable discovery supporting authentication to and use of attributes by
    non-browser applications,

    ? enable discovery of public keys,

    ? enable potential mechanisms for discovering context-relevant OpenID
    providers,

    ? seamlessly integrate with and complement the other OpenID v.Next
    specifications.

    Compatibility with OpenID 2.0 is an explicit non-goal for this
    work.
    (iii) Scope: Produce a next generation OpenID discovery specification or
    specifications, consistent with the purpose statement.
    (iv) Proposed List of Specifications: OpenID v.Next Discovery and
    possibly related specifications.
    (v) Anticipated audience or users of the work: Implementers of OpenID
    Providers, Relying Parties, Active Clients, and non-browser applications
    utilizing OpenID.
    (vi) Language in which the WG will conduct business: English.
    (vii) Method of work: E-mail discussions on the working group mailing
    list, working group conference calls, and face-to-face meetings at the
    Internet Identity Workshop and OpenID summits.
    (viii) Basis for determining when the work of the WG is completed: Work
    will not be deemed to be complete until there is a consensus that the
    resulting protocol specification or family of specifications fulfills the
    working group goals. Additional proposed changes beyond that initial
    consensus will be evaluated on the basis of whether they increase or
    decrease consensus within the working group. The work will be completed
    once it is apparent that maximal consensus on the draft has been achieved,
    consistent with the purpose and scope.
    (b) Background Information.
    (i) Related work being done in other WGs or organizations: OpenID
    Authentication 2.0 and related specifications, including Yadis 1.0. OAuth
    and OAuth 2.0. XRDS, XRD, host-meta, Web Linking, XAuth, LRDD, and
    WebFinger.
    (ii) Proposers:
    Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
    Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
    John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
    Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent


    --
    --Breno

    +1 (650) 214-1007 desk
    +1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
    MTV-41-3 : 383-A
    PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)

    --
    Nat Sakimura (n-sakimura at nri.co.jp)
    Nomura Research Institute, Ltd.
    Tel:+81-3-6274-1412 Fax:+81-3-6274-1547

    ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
    PLEASE READ:
    The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only.
    If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete your copy from your system.
  • Allen Tom at May 24, 2010 at 1:10 am
    Breno - can we add you as a proposer?

    Allen


    On 5/21/10 7:58 PM, "Breno de Medeiros" wrote:

    Agreed.

    While it's clear that other WGs might have to coordinate with the
    discovery WG, I think there's value in having a separate discovery WG
    for the reasons you mention.
    On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 19:28, Allen Tom wrote:
    Hi All,

    Regarding all the various WG proposals ? at least with the Discovery WG, I
    think there?s universal consensus that the existing OpenID 2.0 discovery
    mechanism is very deficient and ?must be revised or even completely
    replaced. Yadis is obsolete and overly complex, and there?s been a lot of
    innovation in Discovery after OpenID 2.0 was finalized.

    The authors of the OpenID User Interface extension found several cases where
    OpenID discovery needed to be updated, yet extending the existing 2.0
    discovery did not quite work. (RP/OP Logos/Metadata, publishing which UI
    modes and display languages were supported, support for browser assistants,
    etc)

    The Discovery WG charter is well defined and ?focused ? the output of the WG
    is expected to be usable for future iterations of OpenID. Given that the
    community wants to quickly advance OpenID, my hope is that the future
    discovery work can be developed in parallel and kept in sync with the other
    initiatives.

    Allen


    On 5/21/10 6:05 PM, "Allen Tom" wrote:

    Per the OpenID Foundation IPR policies and procedures, this note formally
    proposes the formation of a new OpenID working group. ?The charter and
    background information for the proposed group are as follows.

    (a) ?Charter.
    (i) ??????WG name: ?OpenID v.Next Discovery.
    (ii) ?????Purpose: Produce a discovery specification or family of discovery
    specifications for OpenID v.Next that address the limitations and drawbacks
    present in the OpenID 2.0 discovery facilities that limit OpenID?s
    applicability, adoption, usability, privacy, and security. ?Specific goals
    are:
    ? ????enable discovery for and normalization of OpenID identifiers,
    including those utilizing e-mail address syntax and those that are URLs,

    ? ????enable discovery of features supported by OpenID v.Next OpenID
    Providers and Relying Parties,

    ? ????enable discovery of attributes about OpenID v.Next OPs and RPs,
    including, but not limited to visual logos and human-readable site names,

    ? ????enable discovery supporting a spectrum of clients, including passive
    clients per current usage, thin active clients, and active clients with OP
    functionality,

    ? ????enable discovery supporting authentication to and use of attributes by
    non-browser applications,

    ? ????enable discovery of public keys,

    ? ????enable potential mechanisms for discovering context-relevant OpenID
    providers,

    ? ????seamlessly integrate with and complement the other OpenID v.Next
    specifications.

    ???????????Compatibility with OpenID 2.0 is an explicit non-goal for this
    work.
    (iii) ????Scope: Produce a next generation OpenID discovery specification or
    specifications, consistent with the purpose statement.
    (iv) ????Proposed List of Specifications: ?OpenID v.Next Discovery and
    possibly related specifications.
    (v) ?????Anticipated audience or users of the work: ?Implementers of OpenID
    Providers, Relying Parties, Active Clients, and non-browser applications
    utilizing OpenID.
    (vi) ????Language in which the WG will conduct business: ?English.
    (vii) ???Method of work: ?E-mail discussions on the working group mailing
    list, working group conference calls, and face-to-face meetings at the
    Internet Identity Workshop and OpenID summits.
    (viii) ??Basis for determining when the work of the WG is completed: ?Work
    will not be deemed to be complete until there is a consensus that the
    resulting protocol specification or family of specifications fulfills the
    working group goals. ?Additional proposed changes beyond that initial
    consensus will be evaluated on the basis of whether they increase or
    decrease consensus within the working group. ?The work will be completed
    once it is apparent that maximal consensus on the draft has been achieved,
    consistent with the purpose and scope.
    (b) ?Background Information.
    (i) ??????Related work being done in other WGs or organizations: ?OpenID
    Authentication 2.0 and related specifications, including Yadis 1.0. ?OAuth
    and OAuth 2.0. ?XRDS, XRD, host-meta, Web Linking, XAuth, LRDD, and
    WebFinger.
    (ii) ?????Proposers:
    Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
    Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
    John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
    Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent
  • Dick Hardt at May 22, 2010 at 4:39 am
    +1 to chartering this proposal, thanks for posting Allen!
    On 2010-05-21, at 6:05 PM, Allen Tom wrote:

    Per the OpenID Foundation IPR policies and procedures, this note formally proposes the formation of a new OpenID working group. The charter and background information for the proposed group are as follows.

    (a) Charter.
    (i) WG name: OpenID v.Next Discovery.
    (ii) Purpose: Produce a discovery specification or family of discovery specifications for OpenID v.Next that address the limitations and drawbacks present in the OpenID 2.0 discovery facilities that limit OpenID?s applicability, adoption, usability, privacy, and security. Specific goals are:
    ? enable discovery for and normalization of OpenID identifiers, including those utilizing e-mail address syntax and those that are URLs,

    ? enable discovery of features supported by OpenID v.Next OpenID Providers and Relying Parties,

    ? enable discovery of attributes about OpenID v.Next OPs and RPs, including, but not limited to visual logos and human-readable site names,

    ? enable discovery supporting a spectrum of clients, including passive clients per current usage, thin active clients, and active clients with OP functionality,

    ? enable discovery supporting authentication to and use of attributes by non-browser applications,

    ? enable discovery of public keys,

    ? enable potential mechanisms for discovering context-relevant OpenID providers,

    ? seamlessly integrate with and complement the other OpenID v.Next specifications.

    Compatibility with OpenID 2.0 is an explicit non-goal for this work.
    (iii) Scope: Produce a next generation OpenID discovery specification or specifications, consistent with the purpose statement.
    (iv) Proposed List of Specifications: OpenID v.Next Discovery and possibly related specifications.
    (v) Anticipated audience or users of the work: Implementers of OpenID Providers, Relying Parties, Active Clients, and non-browser applications utilizing OpenID.
    (vi) Language in which the WG will conduct business: English.
    (vii) Method of work: E-mail discussions on the working group mailing list, working group conference calls, and face-to-face meetings at the Internet Identity Workshop and OpenID summits.
    (viii) Basis for determining when the work of the WG is completed: Work will not be deemed to be complete until there is a consensus that the resulting protocol specification or family of specifications fulfills the working group goals. Additional proposed changes beyond that initial consensus will be evaluated on the basis of whether they increase or decrease consensus within the working group. The work will be completed once it is apparent that maximal consensus on the draft has been achieved, consistent with the purpose and scope.
    (b) Background Information.
    (i) Related work being done in other WGs or organizations: OpenID Authentication 2.0 and related specifications, including Yadis 1.0. OAuth and OAuth 2.0. XRDS, XRD, host-meta, Web Linking, XAuth, LRDD, and WebFinger.
    (ii) Proposers:
    Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
    Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
    John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
    Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100521/03df9393/attachment.html>
  • Allen Tom at May 24, 2010 at 11:32 pm
    Hi All,

    We now have 2 more proposers to the OpenID v.Next Discovery WG:

    Breno de Medeiros <breno at google.com>
    Nat Sakimura <sakimura at gmail.com>

    So as an addendum to Section b (ii) - the revised list of proposers are:

    Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
    Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
    John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
    Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent
    Breno de Medeiros, breno at google.com, Google
    Nat Sakimura, sakimura at gmail.com, Nomura Research Institute, Ltd.


    Allen

    On 5/21/10 6:05 PM, "Allen Tom" wrote:

    Per the OpenID Foundation IPR policies and procedures, this note formally
    proposes the formation of a new OpenID working group. The charter and
    background information for the proposed group are as follows.

    (a) Charter.
    (i) WG name: OpenID v.Next Discovery.
    (ii) Purpose: Produce a discovery specification or family of discovery
    specifications for OpenID v.Next that address the limitations and drawbacks
    present in the OpenID 2.0 discovery facilities that limit OpenID?s
    applicability, adoption, usability, privacy, and security. Specific goals
    are:
    ? enable discovery for and normalization of OpenID identifiers, including
    those utilizing e-mail address syntax and those that are URLs,

    ? enable discovery of features supported by OpenID v.Next OpenID
    Providers and Relying Parties,

    ? enable discovery of attributes about OpenID v.Next OPs and RPs,
    including, but not limited to visual logos and human-readable site names,

    ? enable discovery supporting a spectrum of clients, including passive
    clients per current usage, thin active clients, and active clients with OP
    functionality,

    ? enable discovery supporting authentication to and use of attributes by
    non-browser applications,

    ? enable discovery of public keys,

    ? enable potential mechanisms for discovering context-relevant OpenID
    providers,

    ? seamlessly integrate with and complement the other OpenID v.Next
    specifications.

    Compatibility with OpenID 2.0 is an explicit non-goal for this
    work.
    (iii) Scope: Produce a next generation OpenID discovery specification or
    specifications, consistent with the purpose statement.
    (iv) Proposed List of Specifications: OpenID v.Next Discovery and
    possibly related specifications.
    (v) Anticipated audience or users of the work: Implementers of OpenID
    Providers, Relying Parties, Active Clients, and non-browser applications
    utilizing OpenID.
    (vi) Language in which the WG will conduct business: English.
    (vii) Method of work: E-mail discussions on the working group mailing
    list, working group conference calls, and face-to-face meetings at the
    Internet Identity Workshop and OpenID summits.
    (viii) Basis for determining when the work of the WG is completed: Work
    will not be deemed to be complete until there is a consensus that the
    resulting protocol specification or family of specifications fulfills the
    working group goals. Additional proposed changes beyond that initial
    consensus will be evaluated on the basis of whether they increase or decrease
    consensus within the working group. The work will be completed once it is
    apparent that maximal consensus on the draft has been achieved, consistent
    with the purpose and scope.
    (b) Background Information.
    (i) Related work being done in other WGs or organizations: OpenID
    Authentication 2.0 and related specifications, including Yadis 1.0. OAuth and
    OAuth 2.0. XRDS, XRD, host-meta, Web Linking, XAuth, LRDD, and WebFinger.
    (ii) Proposers:
    Allen Tom, atom at yahoo-inc.com, Yahoo! (co-chair)
    Michael B. Jones, mbj at microsoft.com, Microsoft (co-chair)
    John Bradley, ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com, independent
    Dick Hardt, dick.hardt at gmail.com, independent
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20100524/e1e429c1/attachment-0001.html>

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupopenid-specs-council @
categoriesopenid
postedMay 22, '10 at 1:05a
activeMay 24, '10 at 11:32p
posts9
users6
websiteopenid.net
irc#openid

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase