tony: spwg call this
morning
... can someone give an overview
jbradly: the summary is we
shouldn't hold our breathe for immediate conclusion. scope
expanding.
... the topic at FIDO is enterprise attestation .
tony: let's get back to web authn
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/1330
elundberg: thought this was ready to go
jeffH: let's not do that here. fly with what you have
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/1402
agl: jeff should take a look at this.
jeffH: yes
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/1424
agl: should input echo the outputs.
elundberg: ... one way we could
do this, is to make this a list with the same order as a long
list
... this may not be worth the complexity
akshay: having pull alllow list, you might not have input for every credential
elundberg: maybe that makes it to complicated.
agl: it was a good thought
tony: have some un-triaged PRs
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/1425
tony: move to level 3
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/pull/1438
jeffH: merge now
elundberg: OK
tony: now move to issues
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/1105
tony: JC what to do with this one
jcj_moz: this is puntable, is someone crafting a PR
JeffH: sure, when I can pivot
back to Web Authn
... this is not critical. but we shoudl point to it
tony: nothing more on network transport , nick
nickS: no
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/1406
jeffH: on to-do list
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/1430
tony: these are untriaged.
akshay: I assume the second case,
parameters are defined directly, there are some extensions out
there that are farther along
... lets not disturb any deployments
elundberg: in web authn all extensions follow this pattern, but not all in CTAP
agl: so all ships have sailed?
eluncberg: do we make a change to web authn, or do we leave it for the reader to discover
agl: I am happy to throw in a note here.
elundberg: OK
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/1435
elundberg: this is a type that
defines an extension point for authenticator inputs
... its Web IDL
agl: shold be stripped out
jcj_moz: I think we forgot to remove this
eluncberg: would it be helpful to
note inputs and outputs
... I will open an editorial PR
jeffH: good
tony: complete this in L2?
elunberg: unless we have a breaking change
agl: fine to get rid of
tony: open a PR on this one.
https://github.com/w3c/webauthn/issues/1437
agl: looks like report of chrome bug, does not need to be opneded here
tony: that takes us through
un-triaged issues
... any specific ones to discuss?
... not hearing any, can end early.
nickM: I'll be leaving the group.
tony: adjourn
* webpage updated with minutes
This is scribe.perl Revision of Date Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Default Present: nmooney, jfontana_, jcj_moz, elundberg Present: nmooney jfontana_ jcj_moz elundberg nsteele Regrets: wseltzer No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: jfontana_ Inferring Scribes: jfontana_ WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webauthn/2020Jun/0115.html WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]