On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote: > > > And unless we get an answer back by end of next week, I would assume the > answer is "it's not a high priority for us in the next few months" so I > would say, given that we do support JWK, as you pointed out we would just > keep "JWK" in the spec, and add back in spki and pkcs when the code is > fixed in a revised CR. > That's still presuming a particular answer. I'm more curious to hear from other implementers whether the steps you just outlined are reasonable at all. In particular, whether there is any probability that spki or pkcs8 will or should be added and whether or not the interface extensibility point added to support all of these matter. If not, then we're making the API more complex for something that no one intends to support - and we should instead change the API while there is still time - and before advancing to PR and signalling that the API won't (substantially) change again.
Received on Friday, 4 December 2015 21:01:37 UTC