Thoughts on deleting the current language in section 8?  No one has
implemented it.

On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Scott Seely <[email protected]> wrote:
> -1. This is for v.Next.
>
>
>
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lane
> LiaBraaten
> Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 9:30 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: [opensocial-and-gadgets-spec] Re: Spec clarification - Refer to
> oauth_body_hash signing in JSON-RPC spec
>
>
>
> Can this wait until v.NEXT?  This didn't really go through the v0.9 process
> I'd rather not open the door for out-of-band proposals now.
>
> -Lane
>
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Brian Eaton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> [+oauth mailing list]
>
> Seems like the right thing to do.
>
> I'm going to declare
> http://oauth.googlecode.com/svn/spec/ext/body_hash/1.0/drafts/8/draft-eaton-oauth-bodyhash.html
> final tomorrow.
>
> Changes since the last revision:
> - omit oauth_body_hash on all request token and access token requests;
> this improves compatibility with various strict OAuth SPs.
> - include oauth_body_hash everywhere else.
> - lots of clean up and general editorial improvements from Eran.
>
> Thanks to everyone who contributed feedback on this spec.
>
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Louis Ryan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to refer to the oauth_body_hash signing proposal as a SHOULD in
>> the
>> JSON_RPC spec in replacement for the ad-hoc body signing mechanism
>> mentioned
>> in section 8. See
>>
>> http://opensocial-resources.googlecode.com/svn/spec/draft/RPC-Protocol.xml#rfc.section.8
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> -Louis
>>
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to