It's not about people using or not using rogue apps. It's about rogue
apps poisoning the annotation data and ruining it for everybody.

Rogue apps can continue to refresh their consumer keys with new
accounts and OAuth app registrations, as soon as the one currently in
use is suspended.

Meaning, a new class of rogue app will emerge. Ones with the express
purpose of getting their data into the namespaces.

To name one example (with reference to Marcel's examples):

- A rogue app that creates tweets with an affiliate link in the
<amazon> namespace.

On Apr 16, 3:31 pm, Raffi Krikorian <ra...@twitter.com> wrote:
> > I'd strongly urge you to consider a more structured and controlled
> > environment for annotations.
> > Ideally, I think an OAuth app must register a namespace, or subscribe
> > to an existing namespace of another app, before it can create
> > annotations in that namespace. And these registrations and
> > subscriptions must be reviewed and approved before an app can actually
> > contribute to a namespace.
> > Being as open and free as you currently have it, it's fertile soil for
> > the poisoning of any namespace by any rogue or not-so-nice app.
> > It's better to plan and create the controls ahead of time. You're
> > going to save everyone, including yourselves, a lot of effort and
> > time.
> the same could happen right now - if somebody puts a $ before something,
> stock twits may try to parse that as a stock market commodity.  i don't see
> us (for some) enforcing anything on the namespaces, and will let the
> community try to work it out.
> if there happens to be a rogue app, then users will stop using it.
> --
> Raffi Krikorian
> Twitter Platform Teamhttp://twitter.com/raffi
> --
> Subscription 
> settings:http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk/subscribe?hl=en-
>  Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -

Reply via email to