No. Supporting two different on-the-wire data formats is actively harmful. Here are two pieces which explain why:
- mnot, this month: http://www.mnot.net/blog/2012/04/13/json_or_xml_just_decide - Me, back in 2009 Pick one. -T On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Paul E. Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike, > >> There are two criteria that I would consider to be essential requirements >> for any resulting general-purpose discovery specification: >> >> 1. Being able to always discover per-user information with a single GET >> (minimizing user interface latency for mobile devices, etc.) > > WF can do that. See: > $ curl -v https://packetizer.com/.well-known/\ > host-meta.json?resource=acct:[email protected] > >> 2. JSON should be required and it should be the only format required >> (simplicity and ease of deployment/adoption) > > See the above example. However, I also support XML with my server. It took > me less than 10 minutes to code up both XML and JSON representations. Once > the requested format is determined, the requested URI is determined, data is > pulled from the database, spitting out the desired format is trivial. > > Note, and very important note: supporting both XML and JSON would only be a > server-side requirement. The client is at liberty to use the format it > prefers. I would agree that forcing a client to support both would be > unacceptable, but the server? Nothing to it. > >> SWD already meets those requirements. If the resulting spec meets those >> requirements, it doesn't matter a lot whether we call it WebFinger or >> Simple Web Discovery, but I believe that the requirements discussion is >> probably the most productive one to be having at this point - not the >> starting point document. > > I believe WebFinger meets those requirements. We could debate whether XML > should be supported, but I'll note (again) that it is there in RFC 6415. > That document isn't all that old and, frankly, it concerns me that we would > have a strong preference for format A one week and then Format B the next. > We are where we are and I can see reason for asking for JSON, but no good > reason to say we should not allow XML (on the server side). > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > apps-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
