Re: [OAUTH-WG] application/x-www-form-urlencoded vs JSON (Proposal)

Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com> Thu, 29 April 2010 22:09 UTC

Return-Path: <beaton@google.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B8CF3A682F for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:09:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.702
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.702 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.275, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id acJvkvzPm+Ak for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:09:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [74.125.121.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBACA3A659C for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:09:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com [10.3.21.13]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o3TM9alr004046 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:09:36 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1272578976; bh=TYN8NryZm9BUUPlNnIb4uTVQvO0=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=qXRQu9Zh3Og0hCl/dW7uhf+wu8h7fF+xkexJkvYjKstY8sfxngEGAmfHu2U1K0OIo 3nl3VxAxKo9gVRHMjnBIw==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=iGKlY9B/cP1gER1v19d9rVq4+ngjhcMGkR5xUL6AErswgRP1f0d+jMCuiMbSJ9B5e tE6qRTFBv6Gi0VQGNrWpA==
Received: from pwj3 (pwj3.prod.google.com [10.241.219.67]) by hpaq13.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o3TM9X3v015436 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:09:34 -0700
Received: by pwj3 with SMTP id 3so5938367pwj.8 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:09:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.1.34 with SMTP id 34mr5686401wfa.206.1272578973245; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:09:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.202.10 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:09:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <z2yf5bedd151004291440g17693f8du9e19a649bef925e4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9890332F-E759-4E63-96FE-DB3071194D84@gmail.com> <20100419134825.134951nuzvi35hk4@webmail.df.eu> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E723438E5C7F45E@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET> <4BD2A172.2070401@lodderstedt.net> <4BD8869A.2080403@lodderstedt.net> <s2zc334d54e1004281425x5e714eebwcd5a91af593a62ac@mail.gmail.com> <v2j68fba5c51004282044o3a5f96cfucb1157d3884d8cd2@mail.gmail.com> <4BD9E1E3.7060107@lodderstedt.net> <7C01E631FF4B654FA1E783F1C0265F8C4A3EF0B0@TK5EX14MBXC115.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <z2yf5bedd151004291440g17693f8du9e19a649bef925e4@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:09:33 -0700
Message-ID: <w2odaf5b9571004291509x8895a73k384a4b4ddb12b794@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian Eaton <beaton@google.com>
To: Mike Moore <blowmage@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] application/x-www-form-urlencoded vs JSON (Proposal)
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:09:52 -0000

On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Mike Moore <blowmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> Can we please just have one format, not 3? The more choices we give the
>> more interoperability suffers.

Yes.  The number of parsers needed to make a working system is
important.  The spec has too many already.

I'd like to see authorization servers returning JSON or XML, since
that's what the resource servers are doing.

...and given a choice between JSON and XML, I'd pick JSON.

Cheers,
Brian