4 ms·

To hinder: to add difficulty. I'd say it certainly does hinder use of the protocol.

• icebraining 13y ago
  "doesn't hinder the use of the protocol outside of their services"
• dragonwriter 13y ago
  > > it doesn't hinder the use of the protocol outside of their services > To hinder: to add difficulty. I'd say it certainly does hinder use of the protocol. How does Google requiring registration before actions are displayed in Google properties hinder use of the schemas in email outside of Google services?
  • ars 13y ago
    Because just like google needs people to register for security, so do other providers. This rapidly becomes unwieldy - how are you going to convince people to register with tons of providers? So this format is pretty much google only.
    • dragonwriter 13y ago
      > Because just like google needs people to register for security, so do other providers. That's probably a bad assumption, once you have more than a few parties using this system. I'd be surprised if even Google used the current, apparently manually-reviewed, registration system for long rather than as a short-term measure before moving to a less cumbersome accountability mechanism (and this is more "accountability" than "security".) But even if multiple parties were using that kind of method, there's a clear incentive -- especially for the players that aren't Google, but even Google has some incentive -- to build a facility where a shared registration application can be automatically distributed to multiple parties.
  • jacalata 13y ago
    I assumed by "outside of their services" you meant non-google people who want to send email using this. On re-read, you mean it doesn't stop anyone else building a client that can understand these actions, right? That's true.