W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcrypto@w3.org > May 2013

RE: Web Crypto Spec Feedback on Dictionaries as return type properties

From: Israel Hilerio <israelh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 20:41:37 +0000
To: "public-webcrypto@w3.org" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
Message-ID: <21fc44c04d934d9ab3c53184fc158a0b@BN1PR03MB085.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Inline is the correct updated Interface for the CryptoOperation (using the latest editor draft), I'm proposing.


On Thursday, May 2, 2013 1:30 PM, Israel Hilerio wrote:
> While reviewing the latest editor's draft of the Web Crypto API [1], we noticed a
> potential problem that might we worth quickly addressing before the spec
> advances to last call.
> Web Crypto defines an "Algorithm" as a dictionary type [2]. The Algorithm
> dictionary is useful for specifying multiple input parameters to a variety of
> functions in a natural, JavaScript-friendly way.
> The Algorithm dictionaries are also available in CryptoOperation [3] and Key [4]
> to allow for inspection of the source algorithm information from which those
> objects were created.
> The potential problem we've found is that Algorithm is provided on
> CryptoOperation and Key as a readonly attribute. This syntactic form is strictly
> prohibited by WebIDL [5], which states:
> "The type of the attribute, after resolving typedefs, MUST NOT be a nullable or
> non-nullable version of any of the following types:
> .a sequence type
> .a dictionary
> .a union type that has a nullable or non-nullable sequence type or dictionary as
> one of its flattened member types" [6]
> Instead, the recommend technique for providing a dictionary type as output is
> via an operation, such as "getAlgorithm()". We'd like to recommend that we
> make a change now to convert the two occurrences that use Algorithm as an
> attribute in the spec to use a method instead. This will avoid a late-breaking API
> change later (at LC or CR) when other working groups review the spec and
> uncover this violation.  We're open to alternative name suggetions-
> "getAlgorithm" just seems like the least amount of churn to address the issue.
> This suggestion will have the following impact on the Key and CryptoOperation
> interfaces:

interface CryptoOperation : EventTarget {
  void process(ArrayBufferView buffer);
  void finish();
  void abort();

  readonly attribute Key? key;
  readonly attribute any result;

  Algorithm getAlgorithm();

  [TreatNonCallableasNull] attribute Function? onabort;
  [TreatNonCallableAsNull] attribute Function? onerror;
  [TreatNonCallableAsNull] attribute Function? onprogress;
  [TreatNonCallableAsNull] attribute Function? oncomplete;
> interface Key {
>   readonly attribute KeyType type;
>   readonly attribute bool extractable;
>   readonly attribute KeyUsage[] keyUsage;
>   Algorithm getAlgorithm();
> };
> Thanks,
> IE team
> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/raw-file/tip/spec/Overview.html
> [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/raw-
> file/tip/spec/Overview.html#algorithm-dictionary
> [3] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/raw-
> file/tip/spec/Overview.html#cryptooperation-interface
> [4] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/raw-
> file/tip/spec/Overview.html#key-interface
> [5] http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/
> [6] http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#idl-attributes
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:15:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:17 UTC