Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri
Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com> Fri, 16 April 2010 20:46 UTC
Return-Path: <eran@hueniverse.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 8D91928C1E2 for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.459
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, 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 5u-9zDbQMIut for <oauth@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:46:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [72.167.180.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 4898528C11E for <oauth@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 29020 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2010 20:45:46 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.ex1.secureserver.net) (72.167.180.20) by p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with SMTP; 16 Apr 2010 20:45:45 -0000
Received: from P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([10.6.135.19]) by P3PW5EX1HT002.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([72.167.180.20]) with mapi; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:45:38 -0700
From: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
To: Naitik Shah <naitik@facebook.com>, Evan Gilbert <uidude@google.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:45:34 -0700
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri
Thread-Index: AcrdmKDVnUh0mMoFR2eiJdpzhyxTiwADSHqY
Message-ID: <C7EE1A7E.3242C%eran@hueniverse.com>
In-Reply-To: <5A37E56E-3F6B-437E-89DF-D2FD8F2EF8E7@facebook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_C7EE1A7E3242Ceranhueniversecom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: OAuth WG <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri
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, 16 Apr 2010 20:46:06 -0000
We should use the right term, not just the less conflicting term. The Web Callback flow uses a callback from the server to the client - this is not a redirection. The User-Agent flow uses a redirection which is fundamentally different from a callback. If you don't want to use callback and want to use the same name for both, it needs to be something more generic like client_uri. EHL On 4/16/10 12:11 PM, "Naitik Shah" <naitik@facebook.com> wrote: +1 for redirect_uri -- highest semantic value imho. -Naitik On Apr 16, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Evan Gilbert wrote: > We should use the same name in the User-Agent and Web Callback flows. Also, although the authorization server won't be allowing JSONP requests, "callback" has become a bit of a defacto standard for JSONP and it would be nice to use a term that isn't overloaded? > > Can we make them both "redirection"? Even better, maybe "redirect_uri"? > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Luke Shepard <lshepard@facebook.com> wrote: > Facebook API requests are protected resources. They can be called either in a browser or in a server-to-server environment. > > For example, a JSONP call for my name looks like this: > > https://api.facebook.com/restserver.php?api_key=361900759629&call_id=1271436355034&callback=FB.RestServer._callback&format=json&method=fql.query&query=SELECT%20name%20FROM%20user%20WHERE%20uid%3D2901279&v=1.0 > > The output (you can play with it here: http://fbrell.com/fb.api/everyone-data ): > > FB.RestServer._callback([{"name":"Luke Shepard"}]); > > If we want that protected resource to take an access token as well, then it would look like: > > https://api.facebook.com/restserver.php?....&callback=FB.RestServer._callback&access_token=ACCESS_TOKEN > > The "callback" parameter is used pretty universally for JSONP requests. For instance, see the Jquery docs: http://api.jquery.com/jQuery.getJSON/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Barnes [mailto:rbarnes@bbn.com] > Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 9:10 AM > To: Luke Shepard > Cc: Eran Hammer-Lahav; Naitik Shah; OAuth WG > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri > > Could you clarify a little more the environment in which this > confusion arose? What do you mean when you say "The protected > resource typically accepts 'callback' as a parameter to support > JSONP."? What sort of software are you including in this? > > --Richard > > > On Apr 15, 2010, at 5:41 PM, Luke Shepard wrote: > > > We already had one developer try it out and get confused because the > > server tried to treat the callback URL as a JSONP callback. > > > > The protected resource typically accepts "callback" as a parameter > > to support JSONP. If a developer accidentally passes in callback > > there (maybe they got confused) then the server can't give a normal > > error message - instead it needs to either detect that it looks like > > a URL or otherwise reject it. > > > > On a related note, I think it's more confusing calling it something > > different in the user-agent flow (redirector) when it's essentially > > doing the same thing. > > > > > > From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of Eran Hammer-Lahav > > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 5:37 AM > > To: Naitik Shah; OAuth WG > > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri > > > > I don't think it is that confusing. Its a completely different > > context from where JSON-P is used (note that in the User-Agent flow > > it is called something else). > > > > EHL > > > > > > On 4/10/10 12:35 PM, "Naitik Shah" <naitik@facebook.com> wrote: > > > > With the simplified params, the callback url parameter is now just > > "callback". Since most major API providers already use "callback" to > > signify JSON-P callback, can we rename this to "callback_uri"? This > > will help avoid collisions and confusion. > > > > > > -Naitik > > _______________________________________________ > > OAuth mailing list > > OAuth@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OAuth mailing list > > OAuth@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > > _______________________________________________ > OAuth mailing list > OAuth@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
- [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Naitik Shah
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Luke Shepard
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Marius Scurtescu
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Richard Barnes
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Luke Shepard
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Evan Gilbert
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Richard Barnes
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Evan Gilbert
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Luke Shepard
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Evan Gilbert
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Naitik Shah
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Eran Hammer-Lahav
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Evan Gilbert
- Re: [OAUTH-WG] Rename callback => callback_uri Eran Hammer-Lahav