I disagree - the idea behind OAuth is to provide access to information on a server without the need for sending usernames/passwords. Nothing more than that. ;-)
You may like OpenID though. Tom On 9/8/10 3:01 PM, shanew wrote: > Thanks for the reply Ken. I understand all you have said, but the real > power of protocols like OAuth is user consent of their own attribute > data. My entire goal is to *avoid* having to ask a user to re-enter > their emal address. In this particular use case "minimally invasive" > is eqivalent to "minimally useful". > > On Sep 7, 7:58 pm, Ken <k...@cimas.ch> wrote: >> Twitter has distinguished itself as a "minimally invasive" social >> network. The API gives you the ability to replicate and build on the >> communication model appreciated by Twitter users. >> >> It's about brevity, it's lightweight and of course you can reach your >> followers inbox by direct messaging, if the user accepts email >> notifications. >> >> Meanwhile, verify_credentials gives you what you need to set up their >> account and log them in when they return. If you need a user's email >> address, just ask them for it. >> >> Ken > -- Twitter developer documentation and resources: http://dev.twitter.com/doc API updates via Twitter: http://twitter.com/twitterapi Issues/Enhancements Tracker: http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/list Change your membership to this group: http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk?hl=en
