Skip to content

Add immediate mediation#272

Merged
nsatragno merged 8 commits into
w3c:mainfrom
kenrb:immediate-mediation
Feb 13, 2026
Merged

Add immediate mediation#272
nsatragno merged 8 commits into
w3c:mainfrom
kenrb:immediate-mediation

Conversation

@kenrb

@kenrb kenrb commented May 1, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This PR adds a new enumeration value to CredentialMediationRequirement, corresponding to the immediate mediation proposal described in a WebAuthn explainer.

The WebAuthn issue: w3c/webauthn#2228
A WebAuthn PR will follow that references this mediation value.


Preview | Diff

@nsatragno nsatragno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR! A few comments.

Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs
@nsatragno nsatragno requested a review from marcoscaceres May 6, 2025 18:51
@nsatragno

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@marcoscaceres, could you take a look as well? Thanks!

Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
kenrb added 4 commits November 6, 2025 14:43
Added uiMode field to enable 'immediate' without it being a mediation enum value
Fix reference

@nsatragno nsatragno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for doing this work! Some comments below:

Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Addressed nsatragno's comments

@nsatragno nsatragno left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approved with a comment, happy to merge after that gets solved.

Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated

@iinuwa iinuwa left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a couple nits

Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Comment thread index.bs Outdated
Address some review comments
@nsatragno nsatragno merged commit 44bbda9 into w3c:main Feb 13, 2026
2 checks passed
github-actions Bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 13, 2026
SHA: 44bbda9
Reason: push, by nsatragno

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@marcoscaceres

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Oh! We should consider getting multi implementer reviews and commitments (as well as filing implementation bugs) before merging PRs going forward.

Otherwise we risk having stuff not get implemented or having to remove things in the spec as happened with #279

@nsatragno

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Fair, although I'm not sure how to resolve the fact that because WebAuthn depends on this spec, patches generally have to land here first.

@marcoscaceres

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

That’s totally fine I think. As long as someone implements stuff. At the same time, other specs depend on this spec, so we need to carefully consider what the impact might be on, say, the DC API.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants