[Bug 25985] WebCrypto should be inter-operable


--- Comment #46 from virginie.galindo@gemalto.com ---
(In reply to Harry Halpin from comment #45)
> (In reply to Henri Sivonen from comment #44)
> > (In reply to Ryan Sleevi from comment #43)

> I believe both Ryan and Henri's arguments have merits, but I might add we
> also would like to leave Last Call and have another call coming up next
> week. 
> Right now, we do have currently zero mandatory algorithms. It is very likely
> that some specialized implementations of WebCrypto (such as that being
> proposed by Netflix) will not be "in browsers." That being said, I also
> recognize that we at W3C owe Web developers some promise of interoperability
> in browsers for some common functions. On the call, Ryan was OK with some
> algorithms being "normative for browsers". 
> Can we revisit Virginie's earlier proposal, but with the following change to
> normative:
> "We will define a browser profile after interoperability testing is
> conducted with different implementations. This browser profile should be
> *normative* and should describe the exact behavior of the browser in case
> part of the algorithms are not available, or partially available, or
> disabled by the user. 
> As such it is required to treat that bug once implementations have been
> demonstrated, which means after the call for implementation (see process
> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfi)"
> Thus, we can add as a "Feature at Risk" going into CR some text that there
> may be TBD normative algorithms for browser implementation, and then
> determine those precise algorithms (if any, but I'd be surprised if there
> wasn't some) before exiting CR. 
> Would that satisfy both the commenters and the editor?

As a note, this would reflect ideas exchanged during last WG call

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Received on Monday, 4 August 2014 14:51:02 UTC