Hi Justin
On 30/01/13 22:29, Justin Richer wrote:
It's not meant to follow the same syntax. Instead, it's making use of
the JSON object structure to avoid additional parsing of the values on
the client side.
We could fairly easily define it as the same space-delimited string if
enough people want to keep the scope format consistent.
IMHO the consistency in representing such a high-visibility parameter as
'scope' is more important than providing for an option to immediately
feed it into a JSON parser
thanks, Sergey
-- Justin
On 01/30/2013 05:27 PM, Todd W Lainhart wrote:
That the scope syntax in draft-richer-oauth-introspection-01 is
different than RFC 6749 Section 3.3, as in:
"scope": ["read", "write", "dolphin"],
vs.
scope = scope-token *( SP scope-token )
scope-token = 1*( %x21 / %x23-5B / %x5D-7E )
Should introspection-01 follow the 6749 syntax for scopes?
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
