Thanks Justin,
I reported this errata at RFC errata report page.
On 2013/01/08, at 0:00, Justin Richer wrote:
> I believe you're correct, Nov, and that this was potentially a mistake from
> the RFC editor. That sentence *should* be talking about the resource owner's
> password.
>
> -- Justi
I believe you're correct, Nov, and that this was potentially a mistake
from the RFC editor. That sentence *should* be talking about the
resource owner's password.
-- Justin
On 01/07/2013 06:53 AM, nov matake wrote:
Hi all,
I couldn't understand why "their" became "the third party's" in the
Hi all,
I couldn't understand why "their" became "the third party's" in the diff
between draft31 and RFC6749 below.
===
Resource owners cannot revoke access to an individual third-party third party
without revoking access to all third-parties, third parties, and must do so by
changing their the
