- From: Henry Story <henry.story@co-operating.systems>
- Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2015 11:08:56 +0200
- To: Carvalho Melvin <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Cc: Read-Write-Web <public-rww@w3.org>, public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <211CFE33-5D7D-40C8-B89E-0F16CA16B0BF@co-operating.systems>
As a pointer for future reference the full thread is here: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-dev/pX5NbX0Xack/discussion <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-dev/pX5NbX0Xack/discussion> Ryan Sleevi keeps arguing that he has fundamental arguments against keygen and client certs. But for each of the arguments presented it is easy to find answer often a UI interface improvement that would solve the stated problems. Other problems are handwaved at and I am still waiting for clarification. There are pointers to other technologies that would be better aparently, but it is suspicious that they should want to remove a working one for yet to be tested ones, which makes it look more like a political/business move than a technical one: removing a problematic competitor is often easier than proving oneself. Hopefully the discussion will help clarify some things. Henry > On 30 Jul 2015, at 18:01, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: > > FYI: Google / Ryan Sleevi's comments on WebID > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Ryan Sleevi <rsleevi@chromium.org <mailto:rsleevi@chromium.org>> > Date: 30 July 2015 at 17:53 > Subject: Re: (Pre-)Intent to Deprecate: <keygen> element and application/x-x509-*-cert MIME handling > To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>> > Cc: blink-dev <blink-dev@chromium.org <mailto:blink-dev@chromium.org>> > > > > On Jul 30, 2015 7:42 AM, <melvincarvalho@gmail.com <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > -1 KEYGEN is in use. > > > > This move will be severely detrimental several grass roots communities, such as the WebID community. > > > > [1] https://www.w3.org/community/webid/participants <https://www.w3.org/community/webid/participants> > > > > This comment doesn't really address any of the technical concerns raised. WebID has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to appropriate ill-suited technology, and has readily acknowledged that no browser implements the desired functionality for WebID to be successful. > > WebID is still nascent, and readily admits it won't work with Edge. An alternative would be for WebID to proceed with standards that are actually widely used and have a viable chance at being usable - such as WebCrypto. > > But it seems odd to hold a feature that was never fit to purpose nor working as desired hostage for experimental activity in a CG. > >
Received on Saturday, 1 August 2015 09:09:30 UTC