Yeah, that is true. One of my reasons for bringing this up was in consideration of proposing a similar simplification around client authentication. But clearly client authn and grants can and will be presented together in the same request. I was aware of the potential for name conflicts but didn't really think it though to the point of needing a registry. I still think there's potential for the core spec to be simplified, shortened and for grants and client authn to be more consistent. But perhaps the value of that is too much diminished by requiring registry(s). There's always name prefixes or name-spaces... but I'll drop it unless there's actual interest out there in pursuing the ideas (which there doesn't seem to be).
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Marius Scurtescu <mscurte...@google.com> wrote: > > There could be conflicts with other extensions that send parameters > alongside a grant request, no? > > Marius > _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
