Re: [xdi] $onelevel versus $depth$1

We should either have $onelevel or $depth$x. If we have both constructs, that will confuse people.

And my feeling is that it's better to have the more generic one rather than introducing an artificial limit.

From an implementation perspective, I don't think it's any harder to implement $depth$4 than it is to implement $depth$1.
It worked well in Higgins, and I remember we actually did have a use case at some point for returning 2 levels in a single roundtrip.

What do others think?

Markus

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 5:05 AM, Michael Schwartz <> wrote:

Markus asked why not use $depth$1 versus $onelevel?

1) $onelevel is a special case. Its the most common depth, so it deserves a special keyword.

2) Why do $depth and $onelevel have to be mutually exclusive?

3) I think its bad practice for servers to support $depth$1 and not $depth$2 etc. I'd rather the XDI server implemenations just say that $depth is supported or not supported, but not partially supported.

- Mike

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: 

For additional commands, e-mail: