Re: [OAUTH-WG] Definition of XML response format

Andrew Arnott <andrewarnott@gmail.com> Tue, 15 June 2010 14:03 UTC

Return-Path: <andrewarnott@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 99AC63A6801 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.623
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.623 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.975, 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 7hkd2DewMFTc for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gw0-f44.google.com (mail-gw0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D18528C12B for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gwj16 with SMTP id 16so3352231gwj.31 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xdrxsazkQRXTQD4k9VYoRScW7qQHNUvWCBM0cV+cPR4=; b=HMdcArwxxPc7vfEsHYF84rW46JJRd794bRIxXTvqrd4fq4GJocXGada5/MLrYA2Mbn 1lmkjA87eSzcSt+OQ0b7m+EHw9bIpamMMGFaDQr3Vb8Vz/Uh7JYxUy64kGHp9LKPOKQP Et6ifQ0+r7rlmpYMAsew6gzczGzaDSi3zGWgk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=SovK08hpJv/RXE32xNUTCS5Z5i/Yjh37zOsmyprgWwWpXtniEPwF55StOvs1kronAM PH+qFX4gudaTi/xB57MnkvyRtvUB3iNyGzPEDyGBzRU+dLNTsB7Pj3EHbPrs9eIsdMe5 rh7bmLIoX3hSzp434uIZbMp1uQnP71ElCboOA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.150.160.14 with SMTP id i14mr8312485ybe.144.1276610633523; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.151.26.19 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343B3EBB68E1@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
References: <AANLkTilZw8KNJ5uwICGm4bCiCJi6OLgGRl4xqWNIEu2R@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinqQIe9nGgnuhLR5uVcYr30OvhfKidqK9i2-kMe@mail.gmail.com> <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E72343B3EBB68E1@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:03:53 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTilsL_pw6xLXEQdlMySr8H_SZsfOMQ3wh3EedAnL@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew Arnott <andrewarnott@gmail.com>
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000e0cd7551654002a048912132c"
Cc: "OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Definition of XML response format
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: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:03:53 -0000

Nope.  I'm happy to see it dropped.
--
Andrew Arnott
"I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death
your right to say it." - S. G. Tallentyre


On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>wrote:

> Since XML was dropped, if you feel strongly about this, please submit a new
> I-D extending the spec to allow XML format responses. Don’t worry about how
> to extend it, just add parameters or whatever for now.
>
>
>
> EHL
>
>
>
> *From:* oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Andrew Arnott
> *Sent:* Friday, June 04, 2010 5:56 AM
> *To:* OAuth WG (oauth@ietf.org)
>
> *Subject:* Re: [OAUTH-WG] Definition of XML response format
>
>
>
> In the absence of anyone else volunteering an XML format, what would you
> say to this as a proposal (because the implementation of which happens to be
> simple for me):
>
>
> <root type="object">
>    <access_token type="string">some access token</access_token>
>    <refresh_token type="string">some refresh token</refresh_token>
>    <expires_in type="number">235298298</expires_in>
> </root>
>
> So the main points here is:
>
>    1. no namespace
>    2. root tag is called "root"
>    3. each parameter is an element
>    4. each element has a type parameter that is either string, number, or
>    object to assist the deserializer to understnad how to cast the contents.
>
> We may axe #4.  In fact we may want to switch all the elements to
> attributes because it's slightly more compact which might help small
> devices.
>
> --
> Andrew Arnott
> "I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death
> your right to say it." - S. G. Tallentyre
>
> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Andrew Arnott <andrewarnott@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Where is the definition of how a auth server response in XML format should
> look?  At the least we need an XML namespace and root node name.
>
> --
> Andrew Arnott
> "I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death
> your right to say it." - S. G. Tallentyre
>
>
>