- From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 15:00:32 +0100
- To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- CC: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>, GALINDO Virginie <Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com>, "public-webcrypto-comments@w3.org" <public-webcrypto-comments@w3.org>, public-web-security@w3.org
On 2015-02-03 14:31, Rigo Wenning wrote: > Anders, > > On Tuesday 03 February 2015 12:42:07 Anders Rundgren wrote: >> Although I agree with what you are saying there's a problem: >> >> None of the stuff you are referring to has ever been directly connected >> to the [UNTRUSTED] web, they are always used with a trusted App + GU. > > if everybody had already thought about it, my contribution would be noise. My > apologies if this is the case. This is a chartering discussion. If thinking > about the eGov use case is overkill, we should state that openly and move on. > I just want this to be a conscious decision. This enables W3C to respond if > asked by the various governments. > Hi Rigo, eGov is definitely not overkill, the problem as I see it is that you cannot develop things of this complexity without having a "team" dealing with the different aspects. Fortunately there's an alternative to shoehorning legacy-crypto in the UNTRUSTED web: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-intents/2015Feb/0000.html Best regards, Anders
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2015 14:01:10 UTC