Hi Ian,
Thank you for all the time you're spent reading this thread.
My understanding right now is that:
- if we want a script to be downloaded without blocking the UI, we should use
async
- implementors shouldn't block the UI while parsing the JS (but it should
still respect the order of
The section on the structured cloning algorithm has a Note that says
Property descriptors, setters, getters, and analogous features are not
copied in this process.
Is this note part of the normative definition of the algorithm, or just a
non-normative helpful explanatory note? The
I personally find this to be a very interesting and potentially useful
proposals. One of the problems that we / the web face is a legal requirement
faced by many Asian banks (esp. Korea) to digitally sign all transactions.
To meet this requirement, they use ActiveX controls, as the platform
I'm excited to see this get some steam behind it, though I'd echo what some
others have said about this being very targeted at the address book use case.
The use case I'm more interested in is a bit simpler: I want to encrypt data
before saving to localStorage. The key may be one that exists
Nicholas:
Sure thing. The symmetric API would look something like this:
cipher.sym.generateKey(function callback(aKey){})
cipher.sym.encrypt(plainText, key, function callback(cipherText){})
cipher.sym.decrypt(cipherText, key, function callback(plainText){})
--- sample code ---
function
Why do you assume I want to access the data from localStorage only while
offline? This use case is for an online data cache.
If I wanted to access the data offline as well, I’d probably still encrypt it
so that it’s not in plain text on disk.
-Nicholas
From:
Another way to do it would be to keep the sym key in localStorage but wrap it
with your private key, requiring a passphrase prompt to use it for the session.
Cheers,
David
- Original Message -
From: Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) ife...@google.com
To: Nicholas Zakas nza...@yahoo-inc.com
Cc:
Very cool, thanks!
Followup question: is aKey in your example a string or a data structure? The
reason I ask is because I'd love to generate the key on the server and then
pass it back to the client for use. When I previously did some thinking about
this, I was thinking of the key as a
- Original Message -
From: Jungshik Shin (신정식, 申政湜) jungs...@google.com
To: Ian Fette ife...@google.com
Cc: David Dahl dd...@mozilla.com, WHATWG Proposals
whatwg@lists.whatwg.org, cha...@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 2:36:01 PM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] window.cipher HTML crypto API
Thank you for the reply, David.
It's my mistake to send it without subscribing to the list. To avoid further
splitting the thread, I'm including below my original email here for others
to see (and to be archived).
BTW, while doing so, I'm adding a pointer to a chromium bug with some more
On Tue, 24 May 2011 17:34:45 +0100, Nicholas Zakas nza...@yahoo-inc.com
wrote:
Your assertion that loading a file that simply defines a function will
solve the problem is a bit too simplistic for most web applications.
Could you describe the case where wrapping script in a function would
In many (all?) cases below the term execution is meant to include
parsing and compilation. I know that's what Nicholas and Kyle have in
mind, and is the motivation behind Gmail's comment hack and my ControlJS
library.
If browsers processed (parsed compiled) scripts in a background thread
it
(Note that the WebSockets protocol is being developed by Ian Fette in the
context of the HyBi working group at the IETF, and not by the WHATWG. The
discussion here is limited just to API issues.)
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011, Bruce Atherton wrote:
According to the spec, establishing a connection is
13 matches
Mail list logo
