Re: Automatic Entry and Forms

Daniel W. Connolly (
Fri, 23 Feb 1996 22:00:47 -0500

Message-Id: <>
To: Robert Hazeltine <>
Cc: Walter Ian Kaye <>,
Subject: Re: Automatic Entry and Forms 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 23 Feb 1996 19:56:03 +1100."
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 22:00:47 -0500
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <>

In message <>, 
Robert Hazeltine writes:
>On Thu, 22 Feb 1996, Walter Ian Kaye wrote:
>> Well, presumably any UA supporting this would also have a set of
>> preferences such as the following:
>>  | [X] Name                                      |
>>  |     ( ) First name only                       |
>>  |     (*) Full name                             |
>>  | [X] Email address                             |
>Let's not presume anything of the sort...
>This is the most pernicious piece of crap that I have seen in a long time.
>We fought long and hard in Australia to get rid of the Australia Card and 
>this is a permutation of the same theme.
>If you are naive enough not to see the implications of this, move over and 
>let others overtake.

Enough of this sort of innuendo, Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt already!

Cite your sources!
Give evidence!
Present your argument!

Phil's draft was a bit brief, but there's nothing wrong with the
mechanism.  All it does is save ths user a little typing: it allows
the browser to fill in the same info the user gave last time. Just
like Quicken's QuickFill (TM?)  feature.

In my original write-up [1], I was a little more careful with the
privacy concerns (for example, be careful with HIDDEN fields.)
and I included a discussion of rights of various parties.

But if you have a REAL problem with the proposed mechanism, please
make your argument plainly.

[1] Proposals for Gathering Consumer Demographics
$Id: Proposals.html,v 1.2 1995/11/06 20:05:28 macarthr Exp $