- From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:02:48 +0200
- To: Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com
- Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org
Hi Frederick, Any feedback on my proposal/questions below? Dom Le jeudi 02 septembre 2010 à 09:50 +0200, Dominique Hazael-Massieux a écrit : > Le mercredi 25 août 2010 à 17:26 +0200, Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com a > écrit : > > I added a warning to clarify that BONDI and Android material are > > informative examples and likely to change. I also removed the empty > > capability sub-sections. > > I see that you've brought back the Features/Capabilities distinction; > but the features sections is entirely empty at this stage, and the > Capabilities section makes references both to Android Capabilities and > BONDI features. > > I wonder if we shouldn't drop that distinction entirely, and simply > talks about "permissions" or "access permissions"? In other words, it's > not clear to me what it buys us to have this layering of > capabilities/features when this distinction doesn't exist in browsers > today, and when the widgets P&C spec only know about a single layer as > well. > > In terms of granularity, I think we should start from the granularity > used by browsers today (e.g. no distinction between > geolocation.getCurrentPosition and geolocation.watchPosition would imply > a single permission string for geolocation) for existing APIs, and start > from what we've described in our drafts for the new APIs. > > I'm willing to take a stab at it (as per my ACTION-263), but only if > that direction makes sense to you. > > Dom > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 08:02:59 UTC