I am fine with that.
On Feb 5, 2014, at 8:06 PM, Mike Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe that we should make this change, since it aligns with the WebCrypto > editor’s draft at > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcrypto-api/raw-file/tip/spec/Overview.html. I > believe that the names “wrap” and “unwrap” came from the older draft > athttp://www.w3.org/TR/WebCryptoAPI/. > > -- Mike > > From: jose [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Watson > Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 3:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [jose] Naming of JWK key_ops values for wrap and unwrap > > All, > > Since JWK key_ops was added primarily to accurately represent WebCrypto keys, > would it be possible to amend the values for "wrap" and "unwrap" to "wrapKey" > and "unwrapKey" to align with the WebCrypto naming ? > > ...Mark > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
