On 04/20/2012 07:17 AM, Derek Atkins wrote:
Paul,
"Paul E. Jones"<pau...@packetizer.com> writes:
Tim,
I do not agree that it's harmful. If I removed the WF discussion off the
table, I'm still having a hard time buying into everything you said in the
blog post.
I implement various web services, largely for my own use. Usually, I
implement all of them in XML, JSON, plain text (attribute/value pairs), AND
JavaScript (for JSONP). For simple services, it's not hard. I do it
because I sometimes have different wants/desires on the client side. (For
more complex ones, I use XML.)
As an individual (and not the chair of OAUTH) I believe that the server
should be allowed, no encouraged, to support multiple formats for data
retrieval. I also believe that clients should be allowed to choose only
one. I am fine with JSON being Mandatory to Implement. I am NOT okay
with making it the only one, and I am even less okay with mandating it
is the ONLY one. I would say MUST JSON, MUST (or possibly SHOULD -- you
can convince me either way) XML, and MAY for anything else that people
feel stronly about (although I feel in 2012 XML and JSON are the two
best). I also feel it is okay to say that a client MUST implement one
of JSON or XML, and MAY implement more.
Why not MUST ASN.1 while you're at it? JSON has won in case
you'all haven't noticed it.
Mike
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
