> -----Original Message----- > From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:mscurte...@google.com] > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 11:04 AM > To: Eran Hammer-Lahav > Cc: OAuth WG > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] 'Scope' parameter proposal > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav > <e...@hueniverse.com> wrote: > > Proposal: > > > > 'scope' is defined as a comma-separated list of resource URIs or > > resource groups (e.g. contacts, photos). > > How will commas in URIs be escaped? We just forbid them? > > If the scope elements are URIs then a space separated list is much safer, URIs > cannot contain spaces.
Yep. I noted that in my proposal. > But, I still don't see the point on trying to define the scope structure. The same point in defining any other parameter - interop. I still haven't heard an argument for not defining it. By definition everything we add to the spec is meant to increase interop and should be well specified. If you want to leave someone under specified, the burden is on your to argue why, not on me to argue for it. EHL _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
