Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

WebAuthn 2021 rechartering #263

Closed
1 task done
samuelweiler opened this issue Apr 5, 2021 · 10 comments
Closed
1 task done

WebAuthn 2021 rechartering #263

samuelweiler opened this issue Apr 5, 2021 · 10 comments

Comments

@samuelweiler
Copy link
Member

samuelweiler commented Apr 5, 2021

New charter proposal, reviewers please take note.

Charter Review

Charter

diff

What kind of charter is this? Check the relevant box / remove irrelevant branches.

  • Existing

Horizontal Reviews: apply the Github label "Horizontal review requested" to request reviews for accessibility (a11y), internationalization (i18n), privacy, and security. Also add a "card" for this issue to the Strategy Funnel.

Communities suggested for outreach:

Known or potential areas of concern:

Where would charter proponents like to see issues raised? (this strategy funnel issue, a different github repo, email, ...)

Anything else we should think about as we review?

2019 charter discussion: #38

@wseltzer
Copy link
Member

wseltzer commented Jul 1, 2021

Under discussion by WG now; please start horizontal reviews.

@r12a
Copy link

r12a commented Jul 6, 2021

The i18n WG believes that section 6.4.2. Language and Direction Encoding, which was added at the last minute without proper review, badly needs to be revisited. I think that section 2 Scope in the charter should probably be updated to reflect that.

@plehegar
Copy link
Member

plehegar commented Jul 6, 2021

First, we need an issue raised against the webauthn specification, one that is also properly tracked by i18n folks.

imho, I don't think we need to update the scope section since it's way too granular to be explicitly called out there. I suggest instead calling out the i18n wg explicitly in the group dependencies section.

@r12a
Copy link

r12a commented Jul 13, 2021

Ok.

@michael-n-cooper
Copy link
Member

No comments from APA; over to @brewerj to complete accessibility horizontal review.

@himorin
Copy link

himorin commented Jul 14, 2021

Fromi18n, the Coordination section differs from the current charter template, and we request that it be updates to align with.
https://w3c.github.io/charter-drafts/charter-template.html This will help avoid horizontal review issues going forward.

@wseltzer
Copy link
Member

Thanks @himorin, updated in w3c/charter-drafts#366
Good to go?

@samuelweiler
Copy link
Member Author

No security or privacy objections.

I think several of the new scope items could use some explanation or rewording. Most of these new items would be clearer to the casual reader if there were a sentence or two explaining the gap being filled.

Here are some specifics:

Binding of ambient credentials;

What does "ambient" mean?

Re-authentication from the discretion of the relying party;

Do you mean "at the discretion"?

Dynamic linking of authentication credentials;

What does this mean?

Storing of private key(s);

What API feature(s) is this about? It's unclear.

@samuelweiler
Copy link
Member Author

Result of AC review: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/webauthn2021/results, 2021-08-25 to 2021-10-01.

@wseltzer
Copy link
Member

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment