Derek Atkins wrote:
Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> writes:
Why not MUST ASN.1 while you're at it? JSON has won in case
you'all haven't noticed it.
Well, now that you mention it... ;-)
But seriously, we're basing this work on an RFC that was just release
six months ago and it requires XML. Why be so quick to drop something
we just published half a year ago? So maybe in 6 months we drop JSON
and add the next big thing? Come on, Mike.
I agree, we should definitely support JSON. But I also think we should
support XML. The client can do what it wants, which is where want the
light weight implementation.
I think you're probably misunderstanding me. I'm (I believe) with Tim
in saying "pick one". Just one. For clients and servers. And I'm only
saying that JSON is preferable because it has pretty much taken
over -- I see JSON all the time with webbish ajax-y data stuff and XML
almost never unless it's something vaguely markup-like. JSON is clean
in a what you see is what you get kind of way, and I'm puzzled by people
calling a 6 year old RFC a "flavor of the day" -- c'mon.
From a programming standpoint, JSON is just easier to deal with. Consider
these two links:
http://php.net/manual/en/book.json.php
http://php.net/manual/en/book.xml.php
and tell me which you'd rather deal with. It's not huge, but it's not
nothing either.
Mike
Mike
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
