Re: [W3C Web Crypto WG] about extensions to Web Crypto specification

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
wrote:

>  If you’re right, you’ve just made the case that no harm will come from
> other organizations’ specs using the WebCrypto extension points.
>

That's an inconsistent statement, if only because they're not using
WebCrypto. They're using something like WebCrypto, that works for their
environment. But it's not what this WG delivered or is chartered to deliver
or what browsers care about, nor productive for this group to discuss.


>
>
> If I’m right, good may come from them doing so.
>

You and I have different values of good, but sure. Something will come of
it.


>
>
> Hence, there’s no reason not to allow it and good arguments for doing so.
>

I've never said we can prevent it, much in the same way nothing we (as a
WG) do that can prevent Microsoft from implementing something totally
different at every one of the API points this WG has worked to define. The
W3C is inherently a toothless organization, and relies upon it's members to
act well and in the interests of web developers.

If you don't care about web developers, whether because you legitimately
don't care or because you're not trying to serve them (e.g. a WinJS or
node.js use of WebCrypto), sure, great. But as a WG, and as the W3C, we do
care about web developers, and the receptiveness or hostility towards new
ideas will be shaped very much by how it affects web developers.