Darien Maillet Valentine

> without the unsafe connotations Could this be explained more, or is there a link to something that would? (In case it’s useful: [where `method` and `formmethod` are defined](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#attributes-for-form-submission).)

> Our main inspiration came from WebIDL which does not support recursive types. WebAssembly is not my domain, but I work with Web IDL a fair amount and I’m curious...

@lukewagner I don't know if it's leveraged anywhere currently. My own Web IDL tools permit it because I aimed for spec compliance and, as far as I can tell, the...

> It's my sense that adding this would make things more - not less - complicated. We should close this on that basis. I had to learn this and have...

> Generally, discoverable keys have so many sharp edges that for users it will likely present a confusing and risky workflow. IMO discoverable keys are there so that certain large...

> Unfortunately this won't work for "username-less" authentication (empty allowCredentials) though. This is why we don’t use it, yeah. Or _nearly_ don’t. We do potentially use it in a single...

Is there any way this could be achieved using `store()`? This is how it’s done for other Credential types. (FWIW: the most challenging thing about this API for me so...

> So there is no way to know that many actions could work before initiating them. I gathered some of that from the thread about why there’s nothing like `PublicKeyCredential.supports(opts)`....

> I’m curious to understand what these scenarios might look like. Since other Credential types permit updating the user/account display fields today without mediation, is there something unique about PublicKeyCredential...

@dwaite I was a bit confused here at first by the edits — but it looks like what happened is that you’d intended to quote parts of my last comment...