Re: Process for "feature at risk" designation

On 4 May 2017 at 17:37, Henrik Boström <> wrote:
> I recently implemented getAlgorithm() but put that CL on hold when I hit a
> minor problem and had other higher priority things to attend to. Adding a
> new member to be serialized for IndexedDB broke loading certificates that
> was stored before that member was introduced and I wasn't sure if it had to
> be able to load that or not.

My expectation is that you don't have to faithfully represent what was
provided as arguments.  That is, you don't have to do things like
maintain the order of dictionary fields, or include attributes that
you don't understand (I mean, you could, but that's open-ended and
would only work if the attribute was serializable, etc...).  That
would allow you to generate a dictionary based on the properties of
the key and certificate.

But as you say, it's not as trivial as it seems.

Received on Thursday, 4 May 2017 09:09:04 UTC