- From: Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:49:37 -0500
- To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
- Cc: public-webcrypto@w3.org
On Dec 11, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 6:03 AM, Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com> wrote:
>> This might be a simple question, but I wanted to see what the group's thoughts are.
>>
>> Right now, a lot of the API is devoted to createFoo() methods. Is there any reason for these not to just be constructors for new object types? For example:
>>
>> OLD: var d = window.crypto.createDigester("sha256");
>> NEW: var d = new Digest("SHA-256");
>>
>> It doesn't really seem like the various operations are sharing any resources, so they don't really need to be tied back to the master Crypto interface.
>>
>> Humbly submitted,
>> --Richard
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> I wasn't sure if you were on the last call (Monday), but I did send
> out an announcement about the updates to the editor's draft, available
> at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/raw-file/f5e8d9a3e18f/spec/Overview.html
>
> You will see that the createVerb-er methods have been renamed to
> "verb", and return Promises-like objects.
>
> I also raised this issue back in August, as ISSUE-37, and discussed
> some of the pros and cons there.
>
> Still, please take a look at the latest editor's draft and provide
> feedback, since this is being proposed as the next public working
> draft (for discussion on next week's call)
Great, thanks. I will take a look at those pointers and provide feedback.
--Richard
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 16:50:09 UTC