Re: [webauthn] More explicitly document use cases (#1389)

@agl summarily closed PR #1300, with the nominal suggestion to simply cite (i.e., whatever/wherever it morphs into a more "official" document).  We certainly ought to cite the latter. However, though, readers may suffer impedance mismatches between what is presently in the WebAuthn spec and the latter document unless the present webauthn scenarios section(s) are appropriately massaged (at least some?)  --- we should probably at least take a look and see if we feel that may be the case.

In any case, I've removed the pr-open label from this issue for the time being.

GitHub Notification of comment by equalsJeffH
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2020 19:53:01 UTC