I have to answer Kveton's response to my last posting just because he answered my answer as fast as I answered his!
Kim: you’re officially the fastest person in the world at responding to blog posts … 🙂
Yes, could this be a problem you create when it gets too easy to log in?
But wait, Kveton continues:
I’ve always said I’m for interoperability … heck, I’ve made a living at it. Choice for the user is always a good thing.
My answer? You build interfaces and test them. You look at the numbers. You test phishing approaches on a wide assortment of people. You find out what works and doesn’t, and keep evolving the interface. If we take this as a starting point, we’ll all end up agreeing.The problem with redirection within the conventional browser is there is no way to know for sure where you’ve ended up – especially if you aren’t a network engineer.
I actually think we’re in agreement here; we both want to find the best experience for end-users and its going to require their involvement to make that happen. Just as InfoCard may not be the end-all-be-all, so too could be the same for OpenID. Either way, both move the ball forward and conversations are happening to make sure interoperability occurs.
There is wisdom in this. But if Kvelton is against giving the InfoCard visual metaphor a try, then I don’t get it. It does nothing to undermine OpenID.I’m all for trying InfoCard visual metaphor. I’m just trying to figure out how you drive adoption of such a different paradigm, hence my comments on iterative development and the OpenID process.
Those are all legitimate concerns. I'm trying to do a lot in one go. I realize it is “somewhat ambitious”. But what have personal computers been about since the get-go? Haven't they always seemed ambitious?
Meanwhile Pamela Dingle posted another comment to which I subscribe as well:
Heaven forbid we ever end up with only one solution anyways — how dead boring would that be?
I’m glad there is choice & competition in this area – it means that nothing is being shoved down anyone’s throat, and that the field is still open for further improvement. It also means that nobody is taking the direction for granted, which I think is a healthy thing. Not to mention, it makes identity conferences ever so much more exciting
Agreed. And there's lots of room to keep innovating for a long time.
