Re: Question re CR phase implementations of [WebCryptoAPI]

Can you please explain what you mean? I fear you may be confused about the
distinction between Chromium and Chrome.

Chrome is a browser based upon Chromium. That is, what Chromium implements,
Chrome does to. That is, as Chromium notes on
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/ChromiumBrowserVsGoogleChrome ("In
short, Google Chrome is the Chromium open source project built, packaged,
and distributed by Google")

Source: I work on Chromium for Google.


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:39 PM, John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com> wrote:

> Oh, oops, looks like that's Chromium, rather than Chrome...
> I think that's not the same thing, so you may need to check.
> According to W3C process, they have enough implementers to go to standard
> without Chrome.
> :-(
>
> John M. Boyer, Ph.D.
> IBM Distinguished Engineer & IBM Master Inventor
> @johnboyerphd | boyerj@ca.ibm.com
>
>
>
>
> From:        Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
> To:        John Boyer/CanWest/IBM@IBMCA,
> Cc:        "public-webcrypto-comments@w3.org" <
> public-webcrypto-comments@w3.org>
> Date:        05/28/2014 02:34 PM
> Subject:        Re: Question re CR phase implementations of [WebCryptoAPI]
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:28 PM, John Boyer <*boyerj@ca.ibm.com*<boyerj@ca.ibm.com>>
> wrote:
> Hello Ryan, Mark, et al.
>
> Now that last call period has ended, it seems likely that CR
> implementation/test phase will begin soon.
>
> I don't know about that :) There's a lot of feedback from LC to process.
>
>
>
> I'd like to get a sense of whether technologies based on this
> specification could be consumed by a particular product.
> This would be governed by whether web browsers will support this,
> particularly for those web browsers that foresee deprecating support of the
> plugin API.  The particular product currently uses a plugin to provide
> digital signing capability to the JS layer.  An implementation of this
> specification seems to provide a promising alternative.
>
> Does the WG have a sense of which members will be providing an
> implementation report to support CR exit?  If so, can you share it now?
>
> Thanks,
> John M. Boyer, Ph.D.
> IBM Distinguished Engineer & IBM Master Inventor
> @johnboyerphd | *boyerj@ca.ibm.com* <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
>
> If you're asking for "who is implementing"
> - IE has shipped a prefixed version on an earlier API. According to
> *http://status.modern.ie/webcryptoapi*<http://status.modern.ie/webcryptoapi>, they're implementing. I have no idea about current work (on promises),
> but it sounds... promising.
> - Safari is implementing -
> *https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2013-October/025707.html*<https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2013-October/025707.html>
> - Firefox is implementing -
> *https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=865789*<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=865789>
> - Chromium is implementing -
> *https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=245025*<https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=245025>
>
>