[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Auth]technical details
From: |
Albert Scherbinsky |
Subject: |
Re: [Auth]technical details |
Date: |
Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:46:24 -0400 |
Ron Burk wrote:
>
> >I have also updated my examples to take into account the
> >feedback on the list.
>
> * Possibly useful to allow the web site to supply the value of a
> data field in its "request". Idea is that sophisticated web sites
> could make initial sign-up highly transparent by handing the
> client his new account name (and/or other information that
> is generated by the web site -- some sites will assign you a
> password, and that option becomes more appealing when
> there's a framework in which the customer never has to see
> or type the password). This is for web sites that can dynamically
> generate the appropriate .gnu file.
This is a great idea. It's an undocumented feature.:) You
can just put text between the <INPUT> tags. You can also mix
text and <GET> tags. It's a substitution template.
> * There's a semantic difficulty in the fact that you've started
> describing a database, besides an interface for requesting
> information. The former is both more difficult, and may unnecessarily
> constrain vendors, who already have their database designed.
> For example, the typical web site just wants to ask for "Credit Card".
> But the personal information database will want to allow for
> multiple credit cards, each of which the user can assign a mnemonic
> name (a name not at all visible in the information request space).
> Same story with addresses, and even names.
Good. Done.
> * I think(!) I understand the motivation for making a hierarchical
> namespace of field names. However, I would feel better if the
> web site could still just use a flat namespace. Most web sites
> just want "Password", for example. Most web sites don't
> necessarily want to specify what kind of "address" you should
> give them. The major exception being when they want to specify
> that the address should be identical to the billing address for
> a given credit card.
Ok. Done.
> * Speaking of having the web server supply data to the client,
> perhaps its useful to allow inclusion of a comment field,
> for the client software to optionally use to describe why the
> web server is asking for this.
Good Idea. I think I need to document more.
Regards,
Albert
--
Albert Scherbinsky
Drop by at: http://members.home.net/alberts/