response

diff --cc doc/bugs/anonok_vs._httpauth.mdwn
index 66a68032f6a31b4a1afe19e0ff816cfbd87bf1e8,8cebfec90010bf997c3d631cd3712f540f4b57f5..1bf9a3750b2d79afebbcc2ab5016c703c9d13ddb
--- 1/doc/bugs/anonok_vs._httpauth.mdwn
--- 2/doc/bugs/anonok_vs._httpauth.mdwn
+++ b/doc/bugs/anonok_vs._httpauth.mdwn
@@@ -36,12 -36,6 +36,12 @@@ and a whitelist of OpenIDs in `locked_p
  >>> would never see the Signin form. --[[Joey]]
  
  >>>> Would I be able to do what I want with a local plugin that
- >>>> knows my auth requirements and abuses canedit -- e.g., if the page
- >>>> matches */Discussion, redirect to Signin form, else httpauth? --[[schmonz]]
+ >>>> abuses canedit (and auth) to reach in and call the appropriate
+ >>>> plugin's auth method -- e.g., if the page matches */Discussion,
+ >>>> call `openid:auth()`, else `httpauth:auth()`? --[[schmonz]]
 +
- >>>>> If you wanted users to need to login with openid or passwordauth
- >>>>> for discussion pages, you could do that. That seems it would be
- >>>>> annoying for httpauth users (who were not current authed) though,
- >>>>> as they would then see the openid signin form. 
- >>>>> 
++>>>>> That seems it would be
++>>>>> annoying for httpauth users (who were not currently authed),
++>>>>> as they would then see the openid signin form when going to edit a
++>>>>> Discussion page.
 +>>>>> --[[Joey]]