Yes. That worked. The timezone was incorrect.
Thank you.
On Nov 1, 1:02 pm, Taylor Singletary
wrote:
> When producing an oauth_timestamp for any method requiring authentication,
> the time needs to be indicated in seconds since the "UTC epoch" -- some
> programming languages have Date & Time cl
When producing an oauth_timestamp for any method requiring authentication,
the time needs to be indicated in seconds since the "UTC epoch" -- some
programming languages have Date & Time classes that deal with epoch time
easily for you, others require more work. In any case, when generating an
oauth
The system date-time is in sync with local date-time. Exactly what
the English OS is. I'm not sure what timezone it is set to, though.
What else should I take under consideration? Could it be that the
timezone is set to Japan yet the date-time is set to local? (It's not
easy to find my way arou
@Gary oAuth takes the current time into consideration, so that really
needs to be in sync.
-N
On Oct 31, 2:56 am, Gary wrote:
> I checked and all characters are utf-8 - the auth header and the post
> body. I tried installing an English OS on the same machine so it's
> not machine specific. I al
I checked and all characters are utf-8 - the auth header and the post
body. I tried installing an English OS on the same machine so it's
not machine specific. I also added charset=utf-8 to the content type
header: application/x-www-form-urlencoded; charset=utf-8. Still I get
the "Failed to valida
Are there any other environmental issues, such as the system clock that
might be different? Are you absolutely sure that all characters are UTF-8 in
both environments, regardless of language?
Taylor
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Gary wrote:
> I should add that there are no Japanese character
I should add that there are no Japanese characters in the message.
It's all English. In fact I did try adding Japanese characters using
the Engllish OS and that worked fine. Even when I used a Japanese
character password, the English OS authenticated correctly.
On Oct 29, 1:01 pm, Gary wrote:
>
