Re: [webauthn] new commits pushed by vijaybh

I don't think that's really helpful.  Why should that be the case?


On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Rolf Lindemann <rlindemann@noknok.com>
wrote:

> E.g. Add: "In order to provide best interoperability, clients should at
> least pass-through the extensions defined in this document."
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Vijay Bharadwaj [mailto:vijaybh@microsoft.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. Juni 2016 19:06
> An: Rolf Lindemann; public-webauthn@w3.org
> Betreff: RE: [webauthn] new commits pushed by vijaybh
>
> Suggested wording?
>
> I did add the sentence in Section 7 encouraging implementation of the
> pre-defined extensions. Does that work for you?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rolf Lindemann [mailto:rlindemann@noknok.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 9:59 AM
> To: 'Vijay Bharadwaj via GitHub' <sysbot+gh@w3.org>;
> public-webauthn@w3.org
> Subject: AW: [webauthn] new commits pushed by vijaybh
>
> I would prefer more encouragement to Client implementers for
> passing-through extensions - at least the ones defined in the webauthn spec.
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Vijay Bharadwaj via GitHub [mailto:sysbot+gh@w3.org]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. Juni 2016 18:08
> An: public-webauthn@w3.org
> Betreff: [webauthn] new commits pushed by vijaybh
>
>
> The following commits were just pushed by vijaybh to
> https://github.com/w3c/webauthn:
>
> * Wordsmithing prose around client pass-through of extensions
>   by Vijay Bharadwaj
>
> https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/commit/69b8763f10fc5af051165dc7bfdeff4bd0409d9d
>
>
>
>
>