Re: [OAUTH-WG] Simpilfying use of assertions when requesting an access token

[Brian Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Yeah, that is true.  One of my reasons for bringing this up was in
consideration of proposing a similar simplification around client
authentication.  But clearly client authn and grants can and will be
presented together in the same request.  I was aware of the potential
for name conflicts but didn't really think it though to the point of
needing a registry.  I still think there's potential for the core spec
to be simplified, shortened and for grants and client authn to be more
consistent.  But perhaps the value of that is too much diminished by
requiring registry(s).  There's always name prefixes or name-spaces...
 but I'll drop it unless there's actual interest out there in pursuing
the ideas (which there doesn't seem to be).

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Marius Scurtescu <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> There could be conflicts with other extensions that send parameters
> alongside a grant request, no?
>
> Marius
>