or results over process?
I (naively) thought that maybe _somebody_else_ (with more influence than a
non-member like me), would be interested in taking a closer look at this
powerful capability. I only seek a constructive discussion on what to do now.
Anders
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:34
On 2016-03-17 06:00, Richard Maher wrote:
Hi Patrick (Congratulations on today) Technical Point follows: -
On a merit-based resource allocation basis, the two most fundamental, essential,
> and absolutely necessary HTML5 Web-App feature enhancements are: -
1) Background GPS device/user
On 2015-10-18 19:09, Aymeric Vitte wrote:
Le 17/10/2015 16:19, Anders Rundgren a écrit :
Unless you work for a browser vendor or is generally "recognized" for some
specialty, nothing seems to be of enough interest to even get briefly
evaluated.
Right, that's a deficiency of the
On 2015-10-17 17:58, Chaals McCathie Nevile wrote:
Regarding App-to-App interaction I'm personally mainly into the
Web-to-Native variant.
As I already pointed out to Daniel, this stuff is not in the current scope
of the group, and you should work on it in the context of e.g. the Web
Incubator
On 2015-10-16 18:00, Aymeric Vitte wrote:
Well, since I was on the list, I took the liberty of commenting a bit on this.
Unless you work for a browser vendor or is generally "recognized" for some
specialty, nothing seems to be of enough interest to even get briefly evaluated.
Regarding
https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebExtensions#Additional_APIs
http://www.slashgear.com/project-spartan-is-now-edge-and-will-have-chrome-extensions-29381422/
It would be a pity if Mozilla and Microsoft implements support for Chrome's
Native Messaging without any discussions on W3C lists.
Although
On 2015-05-08 14:32, Frederick Hirsch wrote:
no objection, the referenced document is a Recommendation, isn't it?
http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-digsig/
This seems to be a rather theoretical discussion:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/SDK/High-Level_APIs/widget
Anders
regards,
On 2015-05-08 14:50, Arthur Barstow wrote:
On 5/8/15 8:47 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
On 2015-05-08 14:32, Frederick Hirsch wrote:
no objection, the referenced document is a Recommendation, isn't it?
http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-digsig/
This seems to be a rather theoretical discussion
https://twitter.com/shimonamit/status/571046844488245248
Not very surprising. It is a very good idea even if the current solution in Chrome is a
bit of a prototype since it is not the extension (which BTW is redundant) that needs to
be vetted and app-stored; it is the native application that
--web2device-bridge.pdf
A defensive publication has recently been submitted for this proposal.
Anders Rundgren
convener/firestarter
https://cyberphone.github.io/openkeystore/resources/docs/web2native-bridge.pdf
On 2015-04-02 11:46, Nilsson, Claes1 wrote:
Thanks for all replies to my mail below.
To address the “security/webapp permission to use the API”- issue I see the
following alternatives:
1.Keep as is: This means that the way permission is given to a webapp to use
the API is not defined by the
On 2015-04-01 16:11, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Nilsson, Claes1
claes1.nils...@sonymobile.com wrote:
However, work is ongoing in the Web App Sec WG that may provide basis
for a security model for this API. Please read section 4,
On 2015-04-01 20:47, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Domenic Denicola d...@domenic.me wrote:
From: Boris Zbarsky [mailto:bzbar...@mit.edu]
This particular example sets of alarm bells for me because of virtual hosting.
Eek! Yeah, OK, I think it's best I refrain from
On 2015-03-21 22:47, Florian Bösch wrote:
Time to revise this topic. Two data points:
1) Particularly with pointerlock (but also with other permission prompts
that sneak up on the user) I often get the complaint from users along the
lines of I tried your stuff, but it didn't work. or I tried
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=378566
Since popular services like DropBox and Spotify depend on this non-standardized
way of bypassing the browser, I think this strengthens my argument that we
really
need a standard way to do this.
The time for that is now.
Anders
On 2015-03-06 10:55, Nilsson, Claes1 wrote:
Yes, that covers my first question. I have also seen Anssi’s CSP extension
specification. I guess that the approach is to see how far we can get in the
TrustPermissions CG on the ideas we experimented with for FFOS, i.e. to find a
way to securely
HTTPS Client Certificate Authentication is supported by all browsers since
almost 20 years back.
It exposes a fully standardized interface to Web Applications which simply is
an URL.
In spite of that it is entirely proprietary with respect to integration in the
browser platform
with
On 2015-02-19 15:47, Arthur Barstow wrote:
On 2/19/15 9:35 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
Hi Anders,
Hi Art,
In the spirit of restricting postings on this list to the group's
chartered scope ...
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/
This work will include both documenting existing APIs
, but WebCrypto may not be the appropriate WG.
This belongs to a WebCrypto maintenance task which is an entirely different
topic than the stuff referred to in my posting.
Anders
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:30 PM, Anders Rundgren
anders.rundgren@gmail.com wrote:
As you probably noted, all proposals
It seems that the web indeed is at a cross-road when it comes to applications
that
are intended to be on par with native:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.webapi/pCY77YAg_i4
The Web2Native Bridge is another take on this matter:
As you probably noted, all proposals related to
http://www.w3.org/2012/webcrypto/webcrypto-next-workshop/
were shot down.
Are we waiting on something, and if so is the case, exactly what?
Is the idea of building on an already semi-established solution like Chrome
Native Messaging unacceptable?
Although I still prefer native messaging, here is a more complete proposal for
a webish solution:
http://webpki.org/papers/trusted-web-apps.pdf
Anders
On 2015-02-17 06:32, Anders Rundgren wrote:
For those who frown at the idea of calling native (trusted) applications from
the untrusted web
the browser a safe place for the
handling of confidential data.
Michaela
On 02/16/2015 03:40 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
On 2015-02-16 09:34, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:
For the first point, Pinning with Overrides
calls their Apple Pay App from the
web because it preserves all the goodies as is.
Why is simple and practical wrong?
Anders
mm.
On 02/16/2015 10:19 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote:
On 2015-02-16 16:54, Michaela Merz wrote:
This discussion is (in part) superfluous. Because a lot of people
On 2015-02-16 18:07, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Anders Rundgren
anders.rundgren@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, I think we will soon see that Apple simply calls their Apple Pay
App from the web because it preserves all the goodies as is.
Why is simple and practical
of standardized trusted web-applications
where only
the invoke/postMessage part is standardized!
Cheers,
Anders Rundgren
1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-intents/2015Feb/.html
2] Although not entirely compliant with the above, the following demo
https://mobilepki.org
On 2015-02-16 09:34, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote:
For the first point, Pinning with Overrides
(tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-websec-key-pinning) is a perfect
example of the wrong security model. The organizations I work
these great systems could work in concert! Here is a concrete suggestion:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-intents/2015Feb/.html
Sincerely,
Anders Rundgren
WebPKI.org
On 2013-10-31 16:04, Nilsson, Claes1 wrote:
I want to say that we are interested in implementing the JSON manifest and
also to discuss additions to the manifest. Content security policies have
already been mentioned and we are looking at something similar to
marc...@opera.com
To: Anders Rundgren anders.rundg...@telia.com
Cc: channy cha...@gmail.com; WebApps HG public-webapps@w3.org;
Jungshik Shin
jungs...@google.com; Gen Kanai g...@mozilla.com; Ian Hickson
i...@hixie.ch; Thomas
Roessler t...@w3.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 22:24
Subject: Re
30 matches
Mail list logo
