I have no objection, but "much clearer"? :-) EHL
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Justin Richer > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 6:04 AM > To: Greg Brail > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Nit: Language in section 1.1 > > +1, this wording is much clearer to me, too > > -- justin > > On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 19:25 -0400, Greg Brail wrote: > > This part of section 1.1 is confusing to me and I stumble whenever I > > read it – I see that Brian Eaton suggested looking at it a while back > > but I don’t think it got changed: > > > > > > > > “OAuth includes four roles working together to grant and provide > > > > access to protected resources - access restricted resources > > requiring > > > > authentication:” > > > > > > > > I would suggest something simpler, such as: > > > > > > > > “OAuth includes four roles that work together to grant and provide > > access to protected resources that require authentication.” > > > > > > > > > > > > Gregory Brail | Technology | Apigee | +1-650-937-9302 > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OAuth mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
