Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] FedCM (was WebID) (Issue #718)

Thanks @samuelgoto! That's very helpful. We're happy with the problem this is setting out to solve, and the general direction, and in particular the alignment with patterns from related well-used mechanisms like OIDC. It is reassuring to see your acknowledgement of known issues, and note that our positive review of this work is based on the assumption they will be addressed as the work progresses.

> reasonable starting point is somewhere like the WebAppSec where more Credential Management APIs are discussed

Do you have anyone from the WebAppSec WG in the FedID CG? Generally we advise connecting with a WG as early as possible to make sure they're aware of the direction of the work and have an opportunity to input, to make it more likely to be confidently adopted when you are ready to take the work on the REC track.

One final note - I saw in the [document you linked to](https://github.com/fedidcg/FedCM/blob/main/meetings/2021/Web%20Identity%20API.pdf) that you have made or may be considering a name change to "Web Identity API"? As I'm sure you're aware, "Identity" is a _very_ ambiguous and loaded term! This might cause misunderstandings or concern about the scope of the work down the line, so we would strongly encourage you to consider "Web Identification API" instead (although sticking with FedCM is also fine).

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/718#issuecomment-1181420182
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/718/1181420182@github.com>