Thanks, everyone.  That sounds good.  I know a redraft of the spec is in
progress.  It would be awesome if this could be clarified in a future
version.
--
Andrew Arnott
"I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death
your right to say it." - Voltaire


On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 6:45 AM, Blaine Cook <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Marc's correct - the intent of the spec is to sign all parameters,
> query string and x-www-form-urlencoded alike, for exactly the reasons
> that Manish notes.
>
> b.
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Marc Worrell <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 30 apr 2009, at 04:53, Manish Pandit wrote:
> >> On Apr 29, 6:26 pm, Andrew Arnott <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>    - HTTP GET parameters added to the URLs in the query part (as
> >>> defined by
> >>>    [RFC3986] (Berners-Lee, T., “Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI):
> >>> Generic
> >>>    Syntax,” .) <http://oauth.net/core/1.0/#RFC3986> section 3).
> >
> > This wording is a bit confusing.  What is meant with "GET" are the
> > parameters in the query part of the URI.
> >
> > In practice, all parameters (from POST and query string) are collected
> > and signed.
> >
> > - Marc
> > >
> >
>
> >
>

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