W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcrypto@w3.org > July 2014

[Bug 25618] Extensibility: Offer spec-blessed ways to extend the algorithms and curves, rather than monkey-patching the spec

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:42:31 +0000
To: public-webcrypto@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-25618-7213-2WIeMhi2vy@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

--- Comment #8 from Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> ---
(In reply to Mike Jones from comment #7)
> I would like us to seriously considering using registries for extensibility
> of WebCrypto - either IANA registries or W3C registries, as it cleanly
> solves the extensibility problem better than any of the other approaches
> that have been discussed.


This comment is completely unrelated to the meat at hand with this issue. The
spec already supports registration of arbitrary algorithms, by virtue of the
algorithms defined in Algorithm Normalization. A registry serves no direct
technical purpose in support of that - it's purely documentary.

However, much in the same way that the W3C does not provide a "registry" of
specs that modify the IDL for the Window or Document, it would be a serious
change in precedent to provide a registry for Algorithms - and, arguably, a
detrimental one.

The W3C process is fully capable of embracing specs on REC track, within this
WG or other.

However, in order to meaningfully address this issue, we don't need registries.
We need to identify the places that are hardcoded with certain assumptions
about algorithms being supported, and tease them out to be like algorithm
normalization. Then, whether you hide it behind the documentation of a registry
(unnecessarily) or you place it within the realm of REC track documents, spec
authors can meaningfully avoid monkey patching.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2014 00:42:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:23 UTC