[OAUTH-WG] application/x-www-form-urlencoded Counterproposal

Mike Moore <blowmage@gmail.com> Fri, 07 May 2010 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <blowmage@gmail.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 CCFF73A6851 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2010 08:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 g9755UpoDTK5 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2010 08:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f181.google.com (mail-qy0-f181.google.com [209.85.221.181]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 494BF3A6B00 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 May 2010 08:06:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk11 with SMTP id 11so1715641qyk.13 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 May 2010 08:05:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=RPG0C3rrFvCKNUdmNkywdRR2yM5na3F/ugiNMS5IR/M=; b=N74qjPklmroMoC3bqCexRsksfaTD4rROUSTo/aMXgP+n/pzx8IKQ7Rn7Jjzo+giHfu +Z7jfbqSHGv6dtKVebwDRH1kbhF16jKk9LSLBZLrWb+uxAyDwz96D0j9S8H8jDctEskp MSoMih4pyu0rLhlzvXTSNxycslJetpA+nJTYw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=vagJqEB+n98/dvjdKVhZ1O0/9pKFW8XkC772hQMcndthyNZcYje+z4L3/JCfWuksoR UFTWi/jHfysC3bxcmGY/1k3z3Sxxw6qqaNZC6589ETfTpyZbyiC5OTOKBT5gGQaEIa4f H69vFyT352nIkgk2Ao0nqXpA7/P8VXhxcPweE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.224.53.80 with SMTP id l16mr1271518qag.308.1273244752219; Fri, 07 May 2010 08:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.222.6 with HTTP; Fri, 7 May 2010 08:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 09:05:52 -0600
Message-ID: <u2mf5bedd151005070805id5a4a784k1f0502ff892e44b7@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Moore <blowmage@gmail.com>
To: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00c09f905f992b50a80486026546"
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] application/x-www-form-urlencoded Counterproposal
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: Fri, 07 May 2010 15:06:17 -0000

I propose alter the spec so that the token responses are encoded with
application/x-www-form-urlencoded, matching OAuth 1.0. I also propose moving
the JSON and XML support for these responses to an extension.

I haven't heard an argument that convinces me that JSON adds anything over
application/x-www-form-urlencoded. It seems to be a preference and as such
can be accommodated as an extension. Thoughts?