Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Early Design Review: Lightweight FedCM (Issue #986)

When reviewing the explainer, it wasn't immediately obvious why this deserves a new web feature when sites could "just" use the existing FedCM API. Among other things, the goals in the explainer seem to be roughly the same as the goals of FedCM itself. I eventually found https://github.com/fedidcg/LightweightFedCM/wiki/Comparing-FedCM-and-FedCM-%22Light%22. That's a little dense for people (me) who aren't intimately familiar with FedCM, but it seems to make the case that this new proposal is almost uniformly simpler than FedCM. The only downside seems to be that there's less IDP-provided information shown in the dialog? Given this simplicity, why does the more-complex FedCM API need to stay in the platform?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/986#issuecomment-2315794396
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/986/2315794396@github.com>