That would work. So would something a a bit simpler. I am not sure I see the need for the username to be passed back. Seems like that could easily be done by the site. Also unsure as to why the special key is needed if it's always just returned as a parameter.
Is this something that can be specified in the OAuth specs? Would be nice to have a standard way to handle this very valid OAuth flow. On May 5, 10:36 am, Doug Williams <d...@twitter.com> wrote: > I'm trying to decide if this could easily be part of [1]? Any objections for > these to be one in the same? > > 1.http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/detail?id=545 > > Thanks, > Doug > -- > > Doug Williams > Twitter Platform Supporthttp://twitter.com/dougw > > On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:27 AM, jmathai <jmat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > When the user clicks decline the flow is abruptly disrupted. I didn't > > see anything in the OAuth spec that specifies how a "decline" is > > handled. > > > It would be nice if there was a "decline" url that the application > > could specify which the user is redirected to.
