- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 18:06:50 +0000
- To: public-webcrypto@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26465 --- Comment #4 from Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> --- I apologize, but I'm still missing something / still find your definition a bit vague, because it seems like you're mixing solution with problem. (In reply to Mark Watson from comment #3) > Because I cannot have an member in an algorithm identifier that identifies > an algorithm to be used with an operation other than 'digest' or the same as > the outer algorithm identifier. To confirm, your problem is simply that the normalized algorithm of an AlgorithmIdentifier is constrained to the operation type of the parent. Can you describe an actual algorithm or problem with this? At least with our other API concerns, there are real and practical algorithms that demonstrate this issue. This seems a bit even more... impractical? > - a container which mirrors the structure of the target type, specifying for > each AlgorithmIdentifier member what the operation is to be used to > normalize it (would need to support members which are themselves > Dictionaries). Apologies, but I still cannot make heads nor tails of what you're proposing. It sounds, which surely can't be correct, that you're proposing duplicating the interface definitions. > - a container which maps from sub-types of AlgorithmIdentifier to the > operation name, so that extension specifications can define that > NewHashAlgorithmIdentifier should use "digest" and > EncryptAlgorithmIdentifier should use "encrypt" etc. I'm not sure the value of "don't monkeypatch" is worth the value here, especially when there's no concrete, real-world use case, and it's just an academic concern. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 31 July 2014 18:06:51 UTC