Re: [W3C Web Crypto WG] how to progress ?

I prefer option two. The more complete the spec becomes, the better
for application developers.

Charlie

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:57 AM, GALINDO Virginie
<Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> After the conversation between Harry and Ryan, completed by the recent
> categorization of bugs done by Harry and clarified by Eric, I understand the
> following :
>
> -          Implementations of the web crypto seems to be still in debug
>
> -          UAs contributions to the web crypto WG does not seem to be high
> priority (Mozilla mentioning next months, Google mentioning reduced
> bandwidth)
>
>
>
> We have two paths to progress :
>
> -          One :  we try to deliver something quick, gathering the minimum
> core of interoperable features (but we will lose our editor who is not
> supportive to this option) (Ryan, I let you correct if I interpreted wrongly
> your emails). In that case we answer the developers expectations to have a
> spec.
>
> -          Two : we give us 5 to 6 months to let implementations being
> debugged, UA discussing interoperable features and align the Web Crypto API
> accordingly (we will have to find a way in W3C to adapt the spec timeline,
> super-limit-chartering aspects, but I am confident we will find a way). In
> that case we make developer waiting but deliver a wider range of features.
>
>
>
> I would like to hear from the WG members preferred *strategy* asap, so that
> we can analyze with W3C the best way to move forward.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Virginie
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees and
> may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure,
> either whole or partial, is prohibited.
> E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable for
> the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the intended
> recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender.
> Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission
> free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a
> transmitted virus.

Received on Thursday, 21 January 2016 17:24:51 UTC