Aaron Parecki

@GaneshToday @mager So I started looking at that and couldn't find a way to place an order at a restaurant, only for courier service :-(

@mager @GaneshToday Postmates has an API? Does this mean I can make an emergency burrito button for my office?

@TechWraith My point is it seems strange that Apple doesn't make an accessory to connect them.

@TechWraith The only input on the Thunderbolt displays is Thunderbolt though!

@veganstraightedge wow yeah! Other than 3 & 4 (implementation details), the only one relatively unexplored is 9! #indieweb #DiSo

@benwerd 👍 My mom taught me how to program in BASIC. My aunt taught me HTML. #indieweb

@benward Nice! I made an open source version of this, still need to do a blog post about it: https://github.com/aaronpk/TVAuthServer

@davidmead Your home page is not pointing at the right micropub endpoint, it should include the query string that the wordpress plugin needs.

@sikkdays okay weird, I will take a look at the email flow! Thanks!

@sikkdays I'm still stumped on the Instagram issue, but post by email should be working.

@MailChimp Thanks! So if I wanted to programmatically create content in a weekly newsletter, I should create a new campaign every week?

@JawboneSupport Just had a nice chat with support and am getting a replacement. Thanks! Hope I don't have to call you back in another 8 mos!

@joshmarinacci sure! you have it already

@joshmarinacci Yours is much prettier than mine is going to be, since I'm writing an OAuth client. #AppleTV

In reading this over, I noticed a subtle difference from the Facebook and
Google implementations, and I'm wondering if this was intentional or not.

Section 3.1 says "The authorization server prompts the end-user to
authorize the client's request by entering the end-user code provided by
the client." The introduction has even more explicitly different wording:
"(D) ... If the end-user agrees to the client's access request, the
end-user enters the end-user code provided by the client."

However this is different from Facebook and Google's implementations, which
work as follows:

- Device shows the verification URI and code to the user
- The user visits the URL and is prompted to sign in to the service
(Google has the extra step of then choosing which Youtube account to use)
- The user is then prompted to enter the device code
- After entering the device code, the authorization prompt is displayed

In reading this draft, the implication is that the act of entering the code
also is the authorization. The problem is that the server won't know things
like the scope or application name until after the code is entered, so it
can't properly show an authorization prompt.

I think this needs to be reworded to separate entering the code from
showing the authorization prompt. I believe it is only a wording change.
Maybe something more like:

3.1 "The authorization server prompts the end-user to enter the end-user
code provided by the client, after which it prompts the end-user to
authorize the client's request."

and in the introduction:

1. (D) "The authorization server authenticates the end-user (via the
user-agent) and prompts the end-user to enter the end-user code provided by
the client. The authorization server validates the end-user code and
prompts the end-user to grant the client's access request."

@whaity There are some notes here http://indiewebcamp.com/Jekyll and several people are doing it!

@whaity Start posting tweets to your own site, then it won't matter as much to stop using Twitter #indieweb

@tinokremer Plus, using SquareSpace as a web host is a perfectly fine solution as long as it's on your own domain. #indieweb

@tinokremer Actually @leolaporte has a @withknown site too! http://www.leoville.net #indieweb

@whichlight @t @MIT #indiewebcamp we went out for lunch! We're meeting at the Cambridge Center Roof Garden.