Consistent Capitalization between examples and spec for token_type#420
Open
alex-dzeda wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Consistent Capitalization between examples and spec for token_type#420alex-dzeda wants to merge 1 commit into
alex-dzeda wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There are two instances where the response in SMART App Launch has the token_type element returned as "Fixed value: bearer", uncapitalized. While this is fine per RFC 6749, the examples in the IG are all "Bearer", so this makes the spec consistent with the examples. (Alternatively, the examples could be updated, but this approach seems preferable).