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

Re: Promise return types

From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:12:07 +0000
Message-ID: <CAL02cgSaQUNhrssYT0pdxK0VORW3gH0g2dvzPVuAFG4-1xZvLw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vijay Bharadwaj <Vijay.Bharadwaj@microsoft.com>
Cc: "public-webcrypto@w3.org" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
>From the perspective of a consumer of the API:

ArrayBuffer is a pretty inconvenient way to return the result, since in
order to do anything with it, you need to make a view on it.  I would
prefer to return

Returning a JWK as an string/object instead of an ABV seems like a
significant feature, not a bug, since otherwise the developer's just going
to have to convert it to a string/object himself.  Could we specify that?

--Richard


On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Vijay Bharadwaj <
Vijay.Bharadwaj@microsoft.com> wrote:

>  Someone asked me a question recently that made me look more closely at
> our return types for the subtleCrypto functions. Should we look at
> tightening these up a bit instead of having them all be Promise<any>?
>
>
>
> Specifically, is there any reason to have exportKey and wrapKey return
> Promise<any> instead of Promise<ArrayBuffer>? The way it's set up now, it
> would be very tempting for someone adding a future algorithm to, say,
> return an object for the JWK export instead of serializing it first as all
> the existing algorithms do. This may develop into a hassle for programmers
> as they would have to track what each algorithm does for each format.
>
Received on Thursday, 6 March 2014 23:12:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:22 UTC