Piling on: +1 for #3.

--justin

-----Original Message-----
From: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Pelle 
Braendgaard
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 2:13 PM
To: OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Scope - Coming to a Consensus

+1 for #3

Since google implemented I always thought it an elegant simple way of
requesting access.

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Joseph Smarr <jsm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I also vote for #3. I think our field experience has shown that a) lack of a
> standard place to stick scope info in access token requests leads to
> per-provider inconsistencies that further complicate libraries, b) lots of
> providers do want to offer scoped access tokens (and show the list of scopes
> being requested on consent UI), and c) we're likely to want to have some
> cross-vendor standard scopes (e.g. "access profile data", PoCo, "post
> activities", etc.) so it's natural to express those as URIs, thus favoring
> space-delimited scope values.
> Thanks,js
>
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Allen Tom <a...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>>
>> I vote for #3
>>
>> There are already plenty of implementations that use a scope parameter:
>>
>> Facebook:
>> http://developers.facebook.com/docs/authentication/
>>
>> Google:
>> http://code.google.com/apis/accounts/docs/OAuth_ref.html#RequestToken
>>
>> Flickr: (called "perm")
>> http://www.flickr.com/services/api/auth.spec.html
>>
>> Yahoo currently requires developers to tell us the scopes that they need
>> when registering for a consumer key. We've received plenty of feedback
>> that
>> developers would rather specify the scope(s) at authorization time, so we
>> would support a multi-valued scope parameter. Space is a reasonable
>> delimiter.
>>
>> Allen
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/30/10 8:43 AM, "Eran Hammer-Lahav" <e...@hueniverse.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > 3. Space-Delimited Scope Parameter Value
>> >
>> > Define a 'scope' parameter with value of space-delimited strings (which
>> > can
>> > include any character that is not a space - the entire parameter value
>> > is
>> > encoded per the transport rules regardless). Space allows using URIs or
>> > simple
>> > strings as values.
>> >
>> > Pros:
>> >
>> > - A separator-delimited list of values is the common format for scope
>> > parameters in existing implementations and represents actual deployment
>> > experience.
>> > - Most vendors define a set of opaque strings used for requesting scope.
>> > This
>> > enables libraries to concatenate these in a standard way.
>> > - Enables simple extensions in the future for discovering which scope is
>> > required by each resource.
>> >
>> > Cons:
>> >
>> > - Defining a format without a discovery method for the values needs
>> > doesn't
>> > offer much more than the other options.
>> > - Doesn't go far enough to actually achieve interoperability.
>> > - Adds complexity for little value.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>
>



-- 
http://agree2.com - Reach Agreement!
http://extraeagle.com - Solutions for the electronic Extra Legal world
http://stakeventures.com - Bootstrapping blog
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to