- From: Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:17:58 -0700
- To: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
- Cc: "Greg Bolsinga" <bolsinga@apple.com>, <public-geolocation@w3.org>
Hi Martin, I like the idea, but it just will not work. Your suggestion, because it is non-binding and because it will probably just be really general ("maps.example.com needs to know your location in order to work"), will still require the user to click-through-to-learn. Doug On Mar 26, 2009, at 2:00 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote: > This is not intended to be binding, so liars will be free to do that. > > This establishes a common expectation from users. If offers a > standard way to get a message about why the notification exists in > front of a user. Otherwise, we have the case where users learn to > click through with no consideration for their privacy - the warning > is effectively made irrelevant. > > --Martin > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Greg Bolsinga [mailto:bolsinga@apple.com] >> Sent: Thursday, 26 March 2009 1:53 PM >> To: Doug Turner >> Cc: Thomson, Martin; public-geolocation@w3.org >> Subject: Re: Intended usage notification >> >> Doug++ >> >> On Mar 26, 2009, at 1:47 PM, Doug Turner wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi Martin, >>> >>> Bad sites will lie, a few will probably do the "right" thing, and >>> everyone else will just be confused. Can't sites just use existing >>> APIs to keep the user informed of what they are trying to do? >>> >>> Doug >>> >>> On Mar 26, 2009, at 1:39 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote: >>> >>>> I'd like to suggest a change that would require specification. It >>>> just occurred to me that the notification mechanism is lacking. >>>> >>>> Currently, when a site (or page) acquires location information, the >>>> typical user interface explains that the site wants location and >>>> offers the user an option: yes/no. This notification does not >>>> provide sufficient additional information for the user to make an >>>> informed decision. >>>> >>>> I have no concrete suggestion, so consider this as requirements >>>> input. Maybe this can be entered as an issue. >>>> >>>> When asked, the user needs to rely on information from the site to >>>> make this decision, information that might only be available from a >>>> linked privacy policy, or from the context of the page, or >>>> something else. >>>> >>>> If the site were able to provide a small snippet of information >>>> that could be provided by the browser alongside its prompt: >>>> >>>> The site http://example.com/ wants to use this information for the >>>> following purpose: >>>> "We need your location so that we can find services near you." >>>> or "Your wife thinks that you are cheating her, we're tracking >>>> you at her request." >>>> or "We are tracking your whereabouts because we think you are a >>>> drug dealer." >>>> Allow this request: [ yes ] [ no ]. [x] Remember this choice. >>>> >>>> Maybe this could also allow a link to the site privacy policy as it >>>> applies to location. >>>> >>>> A second notification would be required if the description of the >>>> usage changes at all. This would allow sites to partition their >>>> usage and would allow UAs to restrict usage to those that are >>>> important to it. >>>> >>>> In anticipation of the expected response to this - I don't expect >>>> that multiple notifications will be common - such a thing would >>>> badly damage user experience. >>>> >>>> Such a thing would be quite useful to establish user expectations. >>>> This could help with the privacy story. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---------------------------- >>>> This message is for the designated recipient only and may >>>> contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. >>>> If you have received it in error, please notify the sender >>>> immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of >>>> this email is prohibited. >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---------------------------- >>>> [mf2] >>> >>> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This message is for the designated recipient only and may > contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. > If you have received it in error, please notify the sender > immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of > this email is prohibited. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > [mf2]
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 22:08:45 UTC