of scope in our implementation to the permissions. For
instance, we, for now, left out the duration scopes suggested by Eran in his
previous email.
It would be very valuable for us to have more explicit texts regarding the use
of scopes.
Best regards,
Diogo Almeida
On Jul 8, 2010, at 7:18 PM
Thanks Eran,
Best regards,
Diogo Almeida
On Jul 6, 2010, at 3:03 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
On Jul 3, 2010, at 7:50, Diogo Almeida diogo.borges.alme...@gmail.com wrote:
Good afternoon,
I would like to ask the WG two questions regarding -09
1)
On section 3.1, regarding
Hello,
Both examples in section 2.1 mention a type parameter, which, if I'm
interpreting the changes correctly, has been removed in -07.
Assuming it's indeed a typo. Where it reads:
For example (line breaks are for display purposes only):
POST /token HTTP/1.1
Host:
.
Furthermore, the authorization server can add any other values deemed
necessary
to determine response scope.
Best regards,
Diogo Almeida
___
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
from the messages / flow without any significant overhead
Best regards,
Diogo Almeida
On Jul 2, 2010, at 5:02 PM, Marius Scurtescu wrote:
If the scopes granted by the authz server are exactly the ones
requested by the client then I don't see the need for the authz server
to send a scope
