W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > January 2014

Re: existing text on ISSUE-151

From: Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:42:10 -0800
Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-Id: <27C1E985-3895-406E-B1A1-65928FDD6E3A@w3.org>
To: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>
On January 12, 2014, at 4:21 AM, Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> Signed PGP part
> On 12/01/2014 01:21, Nicholas Doty wrote:
> > Hi John,
> >
> > I've tried to clarify what I believe to be the interpretation of
> > the current editors' draft text on past calls and in past email:
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013Nov/0088.html
> How
> >
> should we read the following bit:
> "There is no required user interface for the user agent; user agents
> MAY choose to provide no user interface regarding user-granted
> exceptions."
> To me it reads as if the editor's draft makes the UGE optional. I'd
> like to have this clarified before the call for objection closes.

I believe this normative statement is about providing graphical or other user interfaces to the user about this particular feature; it doesn't say anything about the feature itself being optional. In some proposed implementations, users would not receive separate notification about user-granted exceptions from the browser (since the site is responsible for obtaining that consent); that is, this feature might be implemented by browsers without a user interface component.

Hope this helps,

Received on Tuesday, 14 January 2014 17:42:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:21 UTC