On Dec 23, 2012, at 9:41 AM, =JeffH <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> > Thanks for the replies, Jeff.  They make sense.  Particularly, thanks for
> > the "JSON Text Object" suggestion.
> 
> welcome, glad they made some sense.
> 
> similarly, if one employs JSON arrays, I'd define a "JSON text array".
> 
> 
> > For the "claims" definition, I'm actually prone to go with definitions based
> > on those in
> > http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-messages-1_0-13.html#terminology -
> > specifically:
> >
> > Claim
> > A piece of information about an Entity that a Claims Provider asserts about
> > that Entity.
> > Claims Provider
> > A system or service that can return Claims about an Entity.
> > End-User
> > A human user of a system or service.
> > Entity
> > Something that has a separate and distinct existence and that can be
> > identified in context. An End-User is one example of an Entity.
> 
> well, it seems to me, given the manner in which the JWT spec is written, one 
> can make the case that JWT claims in general aren't necessarily about an 
> Entity (as the latter term is used in the context of the OpenID Connect 
> specs), rather they're in general simply assertions about something(s). this 
> is because all pre-defined JWT claim types are optional and all JWT semantics 
> are left up to specs that profile (aka re-use) the JWT spec.

Agreed. I'm using an encrypted JWT that is rendered as a QR code to store state.

-- Dick 
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

Reply via email to