For Facebook at least, we are currently planning to use scope as a
comma-separated list of permissions from this set:
http://wiki.developers.facebook.com/index.php/Extended_permissions
For instance:
oauth_scope=read_stream,email,photo_upload
I'm not sure if that maps to realm exactly.
On Apr 6, 2010, at 8:03 AM, Dick Hardt wrote:
>
> On 2010-04-06, at 12:16 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/2/10 3:27 PM, "Dick Hardt" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> There are times when a resource may have different scope for different kinds
>>> of access. realm != scope
>>
>> No. Realm is a subset. It is what people define as the protected segment
>> name.
>
> Different Protected Resources could require the same scope, so I see realm
> and scope as being orthogonal.
>
>> For any other scope attribute we need to first define it.
>
> Why? Scope will often be application specific.
>
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
