Hi Roman,
We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as editorial.
Please note that we have changed the “Type” of the following errata report to
“Technical”. As Stream Approver, please review and set the Status and Type
accordingly (see the definitions at
https://www.rfc-e
rver)' in parentheses the first time and '(authorization
> server)' in parentheses the second time.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Wilhelm
>
>
>
> *Von:* Warren Parad
> *Gesendet:* 17 September 2023 12:51
> *An:* Aaron Parecki
> *Cc:* RFC Errata S
It does look confusing if we only look at that one sentence, but as soon as
you pull in the whole paragraph, it seems pretty clear
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749
> For example, an end-user (resource owner) can grant a printing
>service (client) access to her protected photos stored at
I disagree with this errata. The original text is correctly representing
that the "photo-sharing service" trusts the authorization server. The
suggested text is ambiguous because it does not make clear which party is
trusting which other party.
Aaron
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 11:00 AM RFC Errata Sy
