Good idea. I have submitted a comment to that issue. On 16 April 2015 at 12:36, Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie < > adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote: > >> Personally I support the suggestion of having a Credentials class where >> the type is defined by a property that is a URI as opposed to sub-classing >> Credential. >> (The spec may define a type such as PasswordCredential identified by a >> URI like http://w3c.org/webappsec/credential/#passwordcredential or >> similar.) >> Similarly, each FederatedCredential from each provider would be >> identified by it's own URI. >> This means there is no need for an "acceptPasswords" option either. >> > > David filed a bug with suggestions at > https://github.com/w3c/webappsec/issues/256 > > Why don't we take this focused portion of the thread there to hammer out > something that we might be happy with going forward? > > -mike > > -- > Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, @mikewest > > Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstrasse 12, 80331 München, > Germany, Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der > Gesellschaft: Hamburg, Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth > Flores > (Sorry; I'm legally required to add this exciting detail to emails. Bleh.) >
Received on Thursday, 16 April 2015 12:55:22 UTC