W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > January 2015

Re: Re ACTION-723 user denial of captured file leading to no capture

From: Kostiainen, Anssi <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 10:17:03 +0000
To: Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>, Nick Doty <npdoty@w3.org>, "Charles McCathie Nevile" <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
CC: "Zhang, Zhiqiang" <zhiqiang.zhang@intel.com>, W3C Device APIs WG <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <61225C70-67F1-48BE-B5A5-55EEE5A75747@intel.com>
Hi Frederick, Chaals, Nick, All,

> On 14 Jan 2015, at 02:10, Nick Doty <npdoty@w3.org> wrote:
> Apologies, I haven’t been following the test efforts on this spec closely, but I didn’t understand the following.
> On Jan 13, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com> wrote:
>> I agree with Chaals that we don’t want to lose this consideration completely, while at the same time recognizing that we want testable MUST assertions.

Personally I agree with Chaals' position.

Even with this MUST NOT assertion, we can implement the use case where the image is stored to the data storage after capture, but that *requires user's consent* (delegated to <a download>). Here's a concrete example:


[The trick is to create a <a download> link in script and assign the captured image to it. Clicking the link will bring a dialog to confirm with the user whether she wants to save the file or not.]

> I don’t see how "MUST NOT save the captured media to any data storage” is not a testable assertion. Storage is a clear side effect and should be verifiable. It might be more difficult to test this in an automated fashion through the existing test runner, but it still seems testable: either manually, or through automated tests that can check storage media mechanisms that a particular user agent uses.

Correct. This assertion can be tested manually, I was not explicit in saying not testable, I should have said this assertion cannot be tested in an automated fashion. I stand corrected.

> The “MUST” normative requirement improves interoperability in making it clear to developers and to users that all user agents who implement this spec will not capture the media to storage. (I’m not familiar with all the details of the previous conversation, but it seems like the WG saw some advantage in not having this vary by implementation.)

Frederick - do you think we could keep the added assertion (i.e. no change to the current ED spec) if we clarify the test case by giving instructions on how to verify the test result manually?


Received on Wednesday, 14 January 2015 10:17:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:33:15 UTC