> my hard work.

But it's mostly not their work - Apple's protocol is basically a bad implementation of OpenID Connect.

I expect that if Apple said it "forked" OpenID, then the HN community would be OK with it. It's all about the optics.

It’s been a couple weeks since I’ve seen this “optics” being thrown around in comments here. Why you keep using this term when the more appropriate one would be “perspective”?

I don't know that I "keep" using that word. I suspect you've seen someone else also using it.

But the reason is because "optics" and "perspective" don't mean the same thing.

Unlike “marketers” a certificate of compatibility is mandatory for many development teams to use an external technology

The certification suite is open source software (produced by the OpenID Foundation mostly at their cost) and entirely free to use:

https://github.com/openid-certification/oidctest

Apple are absolutely 100% free to run the tool and fix any issues found without any payment to anyone except their own engineer's time.

(There is a fee to pay for the 'OpenID Certified' logo and to be listed as certified, but in my opinion just running the free tool and fixing any interoperability issues is a major benefit by itself.)