This may require specifying IDL definitions for JWK keys (presently: RSA and EC keys) that would conform to the JWK definition.
Bug filed based on this thread - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcrypto/2014Mar/0059.html
Specifically, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcrypto/2014Mar/0063.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcrypto/2014Mar/0064.html
As per my comment on the mailing list, I disagree.
Serialized output aligns with the other formats and is necessary in any case for wrap/unwrap. We discussed and rejected providing object input / output instead some time ago and the reasons discussed then still apply now.
We should consider in Last Call whether to *add* the capability to import / export in object format. This would be an additional key format (e.g. "jwk-js").
Browsers still need to support (de)serialization of JWKs for the wrap/unwrap cases.
When this is fixed, this wording in 14.2 will also need to be updated to clarify that the return value is an object and not a serialization:
“jwk” “The key is represented as JSON according to the JSON Web Key format.”
(see discussion in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcrypto/2014Apr/0085.html)