Re: w/r/t Privacy

On Wed, 5 Nov 2008, Kartikaya Gupta wrote:
> 
> I can't specifically name a platform that does this, and yes, this is 
> something of an academic concern. However, I think in order to design an 
> API that is meant to be survive for any period of time, you do need to 
> at least think about some things that are academic concerns today but 
> may become non-academic concerns during the lifetime of the API. I don't 
> think that a platform similar to the one I'm describing is so 
> far-fetched that it won't appear within the lifetime of this spec.

Sure, but we have to optimise the spec for the cases that we know do 
exist.


> The whole point of my argument was simply to point out that the current 
> spec is not as perfect as everybody seems to think it is

I don't think anyone thinks it is perfect, we just think that the idea of 
exposing privacy preferences in the API is even worse than the status quo.

If anyone has proposals for making the API better, I'm certainly all ears, 
and I expect the rest of the working group is too.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2008 17:00:16 UTC