5.1.1. Introduction recommends Grant Management but the maturity level of the document makes it inappropriate to recommend it in the FIANL specification

[Nat Sakimura]

On the 2024-05-01 call, Brian pointed out that recommending/referring to Grant Management, whose maturity level and progress activity are low, is inappropriate. The PR 487 https://bitbucket.org/openid/fapi/pull-requests/487 suggests removing the bullet that mentions Grant Management and the reference from the Informative Reference section.

There were several counter-arguments for it:

• Giving more prominence to Grant Management will likely encourage implementations, thereby accelerating the development of the spec (Joseph)
• Just a single spec cannot build the ecosystem but ecosystems need the collection of specs, and guidance like this is valuable (Dima)

The idea of creating a living document like “FAPI Framework Overview” and moving the paragraph there was suggested by Riffat.

‌

[Brian Campbell]

counter-argument to the counter-arguments is that those things aren’t the job of a security profile

[Dave Tonge]

I agree, that we shouldn’t put it in the final security profile.

A framework overview / ecosystem guide / implementation advice document would be helpful for this

[Dave Tonge]

we discussed, removing the section about FAPI 2 framework - moving it to a new doc and referencing that

[Dave Tonge]

https://bitbucket.org/openid/fapi/pull-requests/496