Why use CDATA? Why not just use unary tags with all the data in
attributes?
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Andrew Arnott
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 5:56 AM
To: OAuth WG ([email protected])
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Definition of XML response format
In the absence of anyone else volunteering an XML format, what
would you say to this as a proposal (because the implementation of which
happens to be simple for me):
<root type="object">
<access_token type="string">some access token</access_token>
<refresh_token type="string">some refresh
token</refresh_token>
<expires_in type="number">235298298</expires_in>
</root>
So the main points here is:
1. no namespace
2. root tag is called "root"
3. each parameter is an element
4. each element has a type parameter that is either string,
number, or object to assist the deserializer to understnad how to cast
the contents.
We may axe #4. In fact we may want to switch all the elements
to attributes because it's slightly more compact which might help small
devices.
--
Andrew Arnott
"I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to
the death your right to say it." - S. G. Tallentyre
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Andrew Arnott
<[email protected]> wrote:
Where is the definition of how a auth server response in XML
format should look? At the least we need an XML namespace and root node
name.
--
Andrew Arnott
"I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to
the death your right to say it." - S. G. Tallentyre
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
