W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Allow ... centralized dialog up front

From: Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 14:24:47 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOK8ODiofTmmAYx2QAiML7BYA0SYhDDjcn9U=fDZdgUg51281w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
More precedent
http://kb.mit.edu/confluence/download/attachments/151094600/android-install.jpg


On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:

> The idea is to allow vendors to improve their UX (if they're so inclined)
> by allowing developers (if they're so inclined) to use a central, up front
> API. For lack of a better term let's dummy it as "requestAPIs" and it would
> work a bit like this:
>
> var gotAPIs = function(mandatorEnabled, optionalAPIs){
>   if(!mandatoryEnabled){ ...; return;}
>   if(optionalAPIs.desktopNotification){ ... }
> }
>
> document.requestAPIs({mandatory: ['fullscreen', 'pointerlock', 'WebRTC',
> 'Webcam', 'geoLocation'], optional: ['desktopNotification',
> 'keyboardSymbolResolution', 'peer2peer'], onAPIs: gotAPIs});
>
> How a vendor presents that to a user is the vendors choice, but the
> semantic lets the vendor use that information for good UX. If a developer
> wants to use that API is up to the developer, if he doesn't, he'd still go
> down the "popup by popup" UX, that's up to the developer. But at least it
> would be possible way forward.
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't propose writing into a specification how the dialog would look
>> like. There does need to be a specification however on the API that
>> developers can use to indicate an applications desire to use any of the
>> dozen or so restricted APIs.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile <
>> chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>> On Fri, 01 Feb 2013 12:59:35 +0100, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Web Security Experience, Indicators and Trust: Scope and Use Cases
>>>>  <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-wsc-usecases-20080306/>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, has anybody actually even read that notes TOC, you can scroll
>>> straight to section 2.6:
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-wsc-usecases-20080306/#trust-decision-management
>>>
>>>
>>> Lots of people, lots of times. It is one of the better-known truisms in
>>> designing security interfaces, and a really well-known principle for
>>> managing security on the Web.
>>>
>>> It doesn't invalidate what Anne said - but what Anne said doesn't
>>> invalidate your suggestion either. As I said, what you propose is what most
>>> of the industry seems to already be moving towards.
>>>
>>> Having it written in a new specification doesn't seem to make much sense
>>> - it is already there. And it is one of they key ideas repeated almost
>>> every time security or privacy comes up in relation to a specification.
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>> Chaals
>>>
>>>
>>> No matter how well security context information is presented, there will
>>>> always be users who, in some situations, will behave insecurely even in the
>>>> face of harsh warnings. Thus, the Working Group will also recommend ways to
>>>> reduce the number of situations in which users need to make trust decisions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
>>> chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 13:25:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:57 GMT