Glad that you are finally getting around to this. I posted it April 10th http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk/browse_thread/thread/960612fbcb8059de/5c2231ff33cff9e6?lnk=gst&q=revoke#5c2231ff33cff9e6
On May 6, 10:28 am, jmathai <jmat...@gmail.com> wrote: > That would work. So would something a a bit simpler. > > I am not sure I see the need for the username to be passed back. > Seems like that could easily be done by the site. Also unsure as to > why the special key is needed if it's always just returned as a > parameter. > > Is this something that can be specified in the OAuth specs? Would be > nice to have a standard way to handle this very valid OAuth flow. > > On May 5, 10:36 am, Doug Williams <d...@twitter.com> wrote: > > > I'm trying to decide if this could easily be part of [1]? Any objections for > > these to be one in the same? > > > 1.http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/detail?id=545 > > > Thanks, > > Doug > > -- > > > Doug Williams > > Twitter Platform Supporthttp://twitter.com/dougw > > > On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:27 AM, jmathai <jmat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > When the user clicks decline the flow is abruptly disrupted. I didn't > > > see anything in the OAuth spec that specifies how a "decline" is > > > handled. > > > > It would be nice if there was a "decline" url that the application > > > could specify which the user is redirected to.
