- From: Doug Turner <dougt@dougt.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 22:21:16 -0800
- To: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "public-geolocation@w3.org" <public-geolocation@w3.org>
Hey Adrian! Yeah, probably misleading. Basically, I think, we want to use the origin. f.e. http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/geolocation/ ==> http://www.mozilla.com I think there was some panic about referencing documents that were not recommendations, but we were thinking about: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/origin-0.html#origin Does this make sense? Doug On Nov 12, 2010, at 3:14 PM, Adrian Bateman wrote: > There was some discussion of the privacy considerations section [1] during the meeting with the TAG at TPAC [2]. > > Currently the spec says: > >> The user interface must include the URI of the document origin [DOCUMENTORIGIN]. > > There was discussion about clarifying the "URI of the document origin" since the origin isn't technically a URI but during the meeting it appeared that, as far as I could tell, none of the user agents with implementations of the Geolocation API actually show the origin instead showing simply the hostname. Does anyone pass the letter of Test 0018 or 0019? > > Do we really want MUST requirements in the spec when it seems no one is intending to conform to them? What value do they have? Overall, as I said during the meeting, I think mandatory requirements on the user experience constrain innovation while doing nothing to improve interoperability. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/CR-geolocation-API-20100907/#privacy_for_uas > [2] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/05-geolocation-minutes.html#item01 > >
Received on Saturday, 13 November 2010 06:21:50 UTC