W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2007

Some issues [was: ready to publish "HTML5 differences from HTML4"?]

From: Diego La Monica (IWA/HWG) <d.lamonica@webprofession.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:27:02 +0200
Message-ID: <2139b1d0706241427t78a8d1e2s8709ffe425c289c6@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Kornel Lesinski" <kornel@geekhood.net>
Cc: "Robert Burns" <rob@robburns.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Maybe both that this issue was already defined in the past messages (in this
case sorry but i miss it) or I'm in wrong, but the phrase "API that exposes
the history and allows pages to add to it to prevent breaking the back
button" (section 4. APIs <
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/html5/html4-differences/Overview.html#apis>)
makes some privacy violation for the user navigation preferences. Maybe that
someone goes on a political site, after on other sport site and after on the
Average Joe's Web Site that gather information about the complete user
navigation history.
I think is better to describe that point as: "API that exposes the history
*for the same domain* and allows pages to add to it to prevent breaking the
back button".
That's all.

Again, sorry if this issue had been already discussed in the past!

---
Diego La Monica
W3C HTML WG for IWA/HWG
IWA Italy Member http://www.iwa.it
http://diegolamonica.info


2007/6/24, Kornel Lesinski <kornel@geekhood.net>:
>
>
> On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:02:42 +0100, Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com> wrote:
>
> > 4) for all of the dropped attributes, we need to immediately explain
> > what the alternatives authors will use (e.g., accesskey, td@scope).
> >
> > 5) the 'style' attribute issue just raised will cause great concern in
> > the population we release this to. Heavy-handed moves like that will
> > create a bad name for HTML5 before we can even get some consensus
> > amongst ourselves.
>
> I agree. I was about to raise an issue about lack of rationale for
> dropping accesskey (which BTW I think should be limited to digits only
> rather than being dropped).
>
> Perhaps this document should omit elements/attributes that are still
> disputed or mark on which there isn't a final decision yet.
>
> --
> regards, Kornel Lesinski
>
>
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 04:32:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:45 UTC