- From: Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:28:00 -0700
- To: Matt Womer <mdw@w3.org>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Geolocation Working Group WG <public-geolocation@w3.org>, Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>
On Jun 17, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Andrei Popescu wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Ian Hickson<ian@hixie.ch> wrote: >> On Wed, 17 Jun 2009, Rigo Wenning wrote: >>> >>> If your assumption that content displayed via the browser (and >>> here it >>> is just something not HTML, like geodata) would be attributed to the >>> browser, liability attorneys would have really new fun ideas about >>> browser vendor's liability. >> >> This has nothing to do with the legal realities, and everything to >> do with >> the implied user perceptions in the interface. >> >> >>> Imagine you could locate the kids on Facebook to better target them. >> >> I'm sorry, but this kind of fear-mongering is where I draw the line. >> >> >> I join Doug in asking for a formal vote on whether we can move >> forward >> with the spec as it stands today. >> > > I thought we had already decided to reject the proposal. Rigo formed > his arguments as a tweak to the Geopriv proposal and since nobody > seemed to change their minds, I thought the existing decision applies. > But if a formal vote is required, then let's do it. Chairs, Matt, Despite reaching consensus, we are still arguing about this issue. In accordance with the w3c general policy, I would like to ask for an official vote.
Received on Wednesday, 17 June 2009 18:29:39 UTC