- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:00:18 -0500
- To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
- CC: GALINDO Virginie <Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com>, "public-webcrypto@w3.org" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
On 01/18/2016 02:52 PM, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
>
> There is no point wasting my or my employers time on a spec that has
> zero traction from other UAs. If this issue can't be resolved, the
> spec needs to die - not the W3C try to save face by pushing an
> immature and non-interoperable spec to PR in order to satisfy the
> powers that be.
>
Again, we're not asking for the impossible :) However, we are asking for
a timeline. Given a conservative baseline assumption that no further
development will happen in existing UA, what do you think would be a
realistic time-line for you to make the edits that would make you happy
with the spec and its interoperability?
In terms of Safari, for W3C purposes each feature needs *two*
interoperable implementations - although of course we'd love more. While
we'd be thrilled to have Safari actively contributing, and we have asked
them a few times off-list to update but they haven't, so a safe
assumption would be to build off the interoperable features of Edge,
Chrome, and Firefox.
cheers,
harry
Received on Monday, 18 January 2016 20:00:47 UTC