W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > November 2012

RE: [capture] keywords (was: Agenda)

From: Josh Soref <jsoref@rim.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 23:30:48 +0000
To: DAP <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <957F1ECDA90E004B8DBDE23CFC94E3A33A5AAF63@XMB103ECNC.rim.net>
Frederick wrote:
> Is this a question of 'taste'/'style' or do we have a fundamental issue here?
> What would happen that is bad  if we did not change our approach? It sounds like keeping it would enable the extension you  mention.

People will enter incorrect values in accept= and bad things will happen occasionally (or often) - but not on the systems the developer tested.

There's really very little reason for a capture attribute of any kind. If we need one, I'd certainly prefer it be a boolean. The reason I didn't ask for one was that this horrible thing was already deployed and I didn't seem to get any traction tilting at windmills  (it's only fun for a few minutes).

Accept= really does everything that matters. The rest should be done by the UAs improving their UI, which they will start to do anyway.

This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2012 23:31:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:56 UTC