[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openid-specs
Subject:    Re: AX 2.0 Data model
From:       Dick Hardt <Dick.Hardt () microsoft ! com>
Date:       2009-12-17 5:52:11
Message-ID: EF3D83FF-3D3F-48D4-AA46-1EF9B5410E6A () microsoft ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


On 2009-12-16, at 7:10 PM, Joseph Anthony Pasquale Holsten wrote:
> I wish I could agree, but the current draft charter[1] mentions "Each attribute \
> property schema is bound to a unique attribute-type namespace, can be described by \
> a standard key string (does not need to be defined through a URL value)." JSON \
> doesn't have a formal or de facto way to do that. 
> Am I just trolling on this issue? Has someone proposed a way to do this namespacing \
> in JSON? Dropped the requirement? 
> In the spirit of constructive criticism, here's a proposal: the top level keys of \
> the JSON object must be AXSchema attribute names. This allows the existing \
> attribute types to be used beside new structured types. You request things by top \
> level attribute name. That's a tradeoff in granularity and means you either request \
> the entire PoCo record, or none of it. 
> 1: http://wiki.openid.net/OpenID_Attribute_Exchange_Extension_2_0

In my opinion, the charter is far to specific. The scope should describe the desired \
functionality at a high level and let the working group determine the specification.

-- Dick

_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
specs@lists.openid.net
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]