Eh, ideally I wouldn't require my users to enter the PIN into our
application. Should I just register my app as Browser-based one and
redirect my users to our company's website?

Also, this may be a question for the maker of our twitter library
(twitter4j) but at what point after the user has authorized our
application to connect to their account am I able to extract the
security token from the request token?

If I pause my application and wait for them to acknowledge that they
successfully allowed the connection in twitter, should I be able to
access that security token immediately.

Thanks,
Bradley


On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Hedley
Robertson<hedley.robert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you set the oauth_callback with a value of "oob", it will not redirect
> the user, but provide the PIN style authorization behavior.
>
> See this older post on the new style of calling these params:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-api-announce/browse_thread/thread/472500cfe9e7cdb9
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Hedley
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Bradley Wagner <bradley.wag...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I work on a Content Management System solution in which we're
>> currently trying to integrate Twitter. Here is the issue:
>>
>> Our software is installed, so while it is browser-based there is not a
>> consistent URL to redirect people to and thus nothing that really
>> makes sense to fill out when registering our application.
>>
>> That said, I'd like to avoid to requiring the users of our software to
>> visit a url and copy/paste a PIN to authorize our application to send
>> updates to their twitter accounts.
>>
>> Is there a recommended way to do this? Where should that URL be
>> redirecting them to? It's my understanding that if they visit the URL,
>> an access token can be generated without the use of a pin (we're using
>> twitter4j for this part). I guess we could just redirect them to our
>> product's website or some page that says "go back into our app and
>> click OK to enable the twitter connection".
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bradley
>
>

Reply via email to