No, it can't be required. Worse yet, it can be spoofed w/ basic auth, so a "blocked" app could just change it's source parameter and appear as something like TweetDeck.
-Chad On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Developer In London <ebilliona...@gmail.com> wrote: > Couldnt the app-id be made a required parameter for the API calls? That way > it can still work with basic auth. > > 2009/6/2 Doug Williams <d...@twitter.com> >> >> Floated the idea. Until we funnel everyone through OAuth (that means no >> Basic Auth) this really isn't possible. It's something we'll keep in our >> back pockets for the long-term. >> Great suggestion though, Jesse. >> Cheers, >> Doug >> -- >> >> Doug Williams >> Twitter Platform Support >> http://twitter.com/dougw >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:01 AM, Carlos <carlosju...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> agreed, I'd like this as well. >>> >>> On May 31, 6:52 pm, Jesse Stay <jesses...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Not going to name names, but there are a few really noisy apps out >>> > there >>> > right now. It would be really nice if, via either the API (my >>> > preference as >>> > it would be less work on your part and fits well with my app), or the >>> > UI, >>> > you enabled users to block receiving Tweets generated from specific >>> > apps. >>> > This would then punish the app developers for creating spammy apps and >>> > not >>> > the users themselves for just using what was put out there, making it >>> > much >>> > less of a mess to control. Facebook does this, as does FriendFeed. >>> > Any >>> > chance you could enable this (please???) for Twitter? >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > >>> > @Jesse >> > > > > -- > cashflowclublondon.co.uk > > ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._ > `6_ 6 ) `-. ( ).`-.__.`) > (_Y_.)' ._ ) `._ `. ``-..-' > _..`--'_..-_/ /--'_.' ,' > (il),-'' (li),' ((!.-' > . >
