W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > September 2009

[Bug 7480] New: use of keygen should trigger a warning.

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:41:08 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-7480-2486@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7480

           Summary: use of keygen should trigger a warning.
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: HTML5 spec bugs
        AssignedTo: dave.null@w3.org
        ReportedBy: rubys@intertwingly.net
         QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: ian@hixie.ch, mike@w3.org, public-html@w3.org


Per previous discussion[1], I believe that it is the policy of the editor to
remove features that any browser that has notable market share do not intend to
support, and then work to come up with solutions that everybody would agree to.

table@summary does something in JAWS and some other UAs, but has issues, the PF
Working Group hopes to someday completely obsolete it, isn't described in the
spec, and any uses produces a warning.

keygen does something in Gecko and some other UAs, has issues, likely will
never be implemented in IE, the HTML WG hopes to someday completely obsolete
it, is described in the spec, and uses currently produce no warning.

Per the discussion on issue 53, I believe that table@summary should be
described even if is recommended against, but at the very least it seems to me
that keygen should get no more favorable treatment than table@summary. 
Therefore, if table@summary remains as it is, the description for keygen should
be removed, and uses of keygen should produce a warning.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Jul/0075.html


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 2 September 2009 11:41:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:00 UTC