It looks like we have some inconsistencies in the way we parse OAuth and OAuth2.

Both definitions allow for missing elements:

In OAuth1.0 , "Request", "Access" and "Authorization" can be empty
In OAuth2.0, element "Authorization" and "Token" can be empty
(Schema here: 
http://opensocial-resources.googlecode.com/svn/spec/2.0.1/Core-Gadget.xml#GadgetXmlSchema).

However, when we parse gadget definitions that have OAuth1.0  with a
missing element, we get a 500 error with "/OAuth/Service/Access is
required".
When we parse a OAuth2.0 definition with a missing element, the gadget
renders just fine. Seems like we should be doing the same for both, if
the specs are equivalent.

(OAuth example with missing element:
http://hosting.gmodules.com/ig/gadgets/file/109228598702359180066/oauth_no_acccess.xml)
(OAuth2 example with missing element:
http://hosting.gmodules.com/ig/gadgets/file/109228598702359180066/oauth2_no_auth.xml)

So it is an error in the opensocial spec, or should the 1.0
implementation be modified to follow the spec?

Thanks,
                   -Igor

Reply via email to