- From: =JeffH via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 22:57:49 +0000
- To: public-webauthn@w3.org
@christiaanbrand wrote: > let me know if you disagree with my addition of the word "removable" hm, I think I understand what you're trying to differentiate there, but I would not do it that way. we have two orthogonal authenticator characteristics: [attachment modality](https://w3c.github.io/webauthn/#attachment), and [transport](https://w3c.github.io/webauthn/#transport). attachment modality of `cross-platform` matches your attempted use of the term "removable" I am guessing. AFAIK, a [platform authnr](https://w3c.github.io/webauthn/#platform-authenticators) (i.e., non-removable) might actually employ one of the transports, e.g. USB, rather than something else that the proposed "internal" platform-specific value is intended to address (i suppose a [platform authnr](https://w3c.github.io/webauthn/#platform-authenticators) could use _any_ of the transports, but having a one using BLE or NFC offhand seems silly). I think the Note in section [5.4.5 Authenticator Attachment enumeration](https://w3c.github.io/webauthn/#attachment) already largely addresses what you are attempting to hint at with the use of "removable". -- GitHub Notification of comment by equalsJeffH Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/882#issuecomment-385553226 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 30 April 2018 22:57:52 UTC