- From: Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:20:53 +0100
- To: Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Greg Bolsinga <bolsinga@apple.com>, public-geolocation <public-geolocation@w3.org>
Hi, On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Doug Turner<doug.turner@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 12, 2009, at 11:57 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > >> On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:49:12 +0200, Greg Bolsinga <bolsinga@apple.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Jun 12, 2009, at 10:52 AM, Ian Hickson wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Richard Barnes wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Given the minimal impact of these changes, and the large possible >>>>> benefit, I would like to propose that the changes be incorporated into >>>>> the current draft before last call. >>>> >>>> Personally, I strongly reject this proposal on the grounds described >>>> above >>>> -- that this would dramatically damage the trust users have in user >>>> agentsand would on the long term lead to a significantly worsened user >>>> experience in surfing the Web in terms of privacy and security. >>> >>> +1. I do not think this should be a part of the Geolocation >>> specification. >> >> Agreed, the outlined approach sounds way too brittle and does not actually >> give users control. > > > > I appreciate Richard's work and compromise, but I do not think Geopriv is > right for the web for the reasons we outlined back in December. > > +1. I do not think that this should be part of the Geolocation > specification. > +1. I fully agree with Ian, Greg, Anne and Doug that the proposed API extensions should not be part of the Geolocation specification. Thanks, Andrei
Received on Friday, 12 June 2009 21:21:31 UTC