The effort here is (was intended to be) making a list of known issues and not so much trying to fix them.
EHL > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Stephen Farrell > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 2:19 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: consumer (was Re: [oauth] Re: OAuth FAIL) > > > > > Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote: > > It is time to admit that while the terms fit the model, they confuse > the shit out of everyone reading the spec. That's a clear FAIL. > > I think that's a good synopsis:-) > > Just one thing though, given that the putative IETF WG is probably > going to be chartered to address these terminology issues (at least > according to the current charter), folks here should be ready for > another round of changes if/when the IETF WG gets spun up. > > No harm to have improved proposals in the meantime of course, but > some or all of this is likely to be revisited in the IETF context > since that'll be a different set of folks on a different list > working to the IETF's rough consensus model. > > It'd help there if draft-hammer-oauth-01 (assuming you plan to do > one before the IETF meeting) has a good section listing all changes > since draft-hammer-oauth-00. > > S. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OAuth" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/oauth?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
