Definitely agree with these points, though I'd add that I want to see a standardized binding to OAuth2.
-- Justin On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 15:59 +0000, Alexis Richardson wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Julien Genestoux > <[email protected]> wrote: > > All, > > I think it's time to move forward and clean up the protocol a bit. Right > > now, I believe it is too specific on some points (explicit support for > > Atom), but also a little too vague on other points. > > I probably don't want to discuss all the changes in details in this thread, > > but maybe list a couple ideas, as well as get volunteers to help with this. > > The goal is too clean up the spec, and maybe write a couple > > extensions/guideline on top of it for specific use cases (private > > resources)... > > Here is in my mind a couple things that needs to be > > addresses/changed/updated/improved: > > - Support for arbitrary content > > - Support for private feeds > > - Removal of verify_token > > - Subscription invalidation/expiration > > - Publisher - Hub relationship > > - Topic "redirection". > > Please add your topic/name to that list and post another message to address > > it in more details. Hopefully this thread will help us keep track of what > > changes are being worked on.
