W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Actions 183 and 176 (which seem to be the same)

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 10:04:57 +0200
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4113804.9491OOTFnx@hegel.sophia.w3.org>
On Sunday 06 May 2012 09:41:42 David Singer wrote:
> I thought the consensus in DC was that we would explore having two calls;
> that a web-wide exception for a third party would be a separate
> call.  But the action seems to be telling me that the consensus was
> something else.  Am I mis-reading the action?

I am strongly in favor of flexibility because I believe that it will be of 
prime importance that businesses can ask the user for permission in whatever 
context they are. So is there a good reason for the restriction to only 
allow the call for web-wide exceptions from the origin of the beneficiary of 
that web-wide exception? Nick, feel free to take that offline, because I 
feel I don't fully understand the issue.

Rigo
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 08:05:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:28 UTC