<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-AU link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Hey all:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>What do people think about having keys for Koha APIs? Someone would register a key in Koha and give that key to the developer, the developer puts it in their app configuration, and they’re good to go. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>One advantage would be that apps utilizing web services wouldn’t actually have access to Koha itself – just to the APIs associated with the API key. By that same token, a Koha administrator could easily revoke access to an API if necessary for whatever reason.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I’m sure there are other advantages as well. I was thinking a single API key could replace the username/password pair, but you still might want a client_id and an API key, so you’re still managing two fields in your configuration.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Anyway, just a thought.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-AU'>David Cook<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-AU'>Systems Librarian<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-AU'>Prosentient Systems<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-AU'>72/330 Wattle St, Ultimo, NSW 2007<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>