> For example, the CryptoHash > interface can be implemented independently of the rest of the API and > provides value by itself.
Moving forward on that part first sounds reasonable. I've been asked about that specifically by some app developers that really aren't interested in the other parts of the larger proposal. On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Sam Weinig <wei...@apple.com> wrote: > I think we should let the spec mature a bit before diving in. > > -Sam > > On Jul 26, 2011, at 10:53 PM, Adam Barth wrote: > > > Hi webkit-dev, > > > > As some of you are probably aware, Mozilla is experimenting with > > exposing some basic cryptographic primitives to web applications: > > > > https://wiki.mozilla.org/Privacy/Features/DOMCryptAPISpec/Latest > > > > I wanted to get a sense from the WebKit community about how interested > > we are in implementing this feature. My sense is that this API is > > fairly early in it's lifecycle, so one perspective is that we should > > wait for Mozilla to experiment for a bit longer and revisit this > > question once the design is further along (e.g., submitted to the W3C > > standards process). > > > > Another perspective is that there are some simple parts of the API > > that we should implement now, and we can grow into the more involved > > parts of the API as they mature. For example, the CryptoHash > > interface can be implemented independently of the rest of the API and > > provides value by itself. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Adam > > _______________________________________________ > > webkit-dev mailing list > > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
