[Openid-specs-ab] [Bitbucket] Issue #835: Clarify the expected JSON type(s) of "value" and "values" in the claims request JSON object (openid/connect)

Nat Sakimura sakimura at gmail.com
Sun Jun 2 23:25:38 UTC 2013


Actually, I am asking the guidance between the use of 'claims' top-level
parameter and 'request' parameter.

'claims' parameter was added by #748 to ease the writing of MTI and request
parameter processing rules. From spec writing point of view, that is more
elegant and fine. I just thought that developers who reads this spec may
wonder when they should pick one or the other.


2013/6/3 Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>

>  The “claims” parameter is always what is used to request individual
> claims.  Independent of that, the “claims” parameter is one of the
> parameters that can either occur as a query parameter value, or within a
> request object passed either as a query parameter value using the “request”
> parameter or by reference using the “request_uri” parameter.****
>
> ** **
>
> I think you’re really asking the question “what is the guidance between
> using request parameters passed as query parameters and using request
> parameters passed by reference or by value using a Request Object”.  The
> question is independent of whether the “claims” parameter is used.****
>
> ** **
>
>                                                             -- Mike****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net [mailto:
> openid-specs-ab-bounces at lists.openid.net] *On Behalf Of *Nat Sakimura
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 02, 2013 3:55 PM
> *To:* Michael Jones; openid-specs-ab at lists.openid.net
> *Subject:* Re: [Openid-specs-ab] [Bitbucket] Issue #835: Clarify the
> expected JSON type(s) of "value" and "values" in the claims request JSON
> object (openid/connect)****
>
> ** **
>
> A naive question. ****
>
> ** **
>
> What is the guidance between the requesting claims in 'claims' request
> parameter and the request object? ****
>
> ** **
>
> From what I see, 'claims' request parameter features are completely
> covered by request object. Main differences are that request object can
> specify other parameter such as response_types as well as other security
> parameters and can be signed (it is a compact serialized JWS), while
> 'claims' parameter is form encoded. ****
>
> ** **
>
> 2013/5/30 Michael Jones <issues-reply at bitbucket.org>****
>
> ****
>
> *Michael Jones* commented on issue #835: ****
>
> *Clarify the expected JSON type(s) of "value" and "values" in the claims
> request JSON object<https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issue/835/clarify-the-expected-json-type-s-of-value>
> *
>
> Fixed #835<https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issue/835/clarify-the-expected-json-type-s-of-value>- Clarified requirements on using "value" and "values" qualifiers when
> requesting specific values for individual claims.****
>
> → <<cset 6af1216a68a0<https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/commits/6af1216a68a0>
> >>****
>
> Status:****
>
> new resolved ****
>
> View this issue<https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issue/835/clarify-the-expected-json-type-s-of-value>or add a comment by replying to this email.
> ****
>
> Unsubscribe from issue emails<https://bitbucket.org/openid/connect/issue/835/unsubscribe/Nat/6c4f45461cac10ce372f1f81a7903130e0898f5c/>for this repository.
> ****
>
> **** <https://bitbucket.org>
>
>
>
> **** <https://bitbucket.org>
>
> ** ** <https://bitbucket.org>
>
> --
> Nat Sakimura (=nat)**** <https://bitbucket.org>
>
> Chairman, OpenID Foundation
> *http://nat.sakimura.org/*
> @_nat_en**** <https://bitbucket.org>
>



-- 
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
Chairman, OpenID Foundation
http://nat.sakimura.org/
@_nat_en
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-ab/attachments/20130603/fedfd1b2/attachment.html>


More information about the Openid-specs-ab mailing list