- From: Wojciech Masłowski <wmaslowski@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:14:45 +0200
- To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- CC: Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Steve Block <steveblock@google.com>, Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>, Lars Erik Bolstad <lbolstad@opera.com>, "public-geolocation@w3.org" <public-geolocation@w3.org>
W dniu 2011-06-30 14:07, Dominique Hazael-Massieux pisze: > Le jeudi 30 juin 2011 à 12:01 +0100, Andrei Popescu a écrit : >> But what exactly is "too many" or "too close"? Pick too small a number >> and you'll break many use-cases. Pick a bigger number and the privacy >> benefit quickly evaporates. > I don't know that we already have the answer; I think it's already clear > that the "single location" proximity case represents a privacy benefits > over using watchPosition(). > > For other cases, I think we would need to look at some concrete use > cases to get actual values (but I would keep the values user-agent > dependent). > > As a strawman example, I can imagine that a user agent would block (or > make it very hard to accept) an application that requests proximity > alerts every meter on a zone greater than 1km². > Every meter maybe not, but I think an app which shows you what is on sale in the shop next to you could set up loads of proximity alerts near you when you are in a shopping center. > Also, I think there is plenty of space for innovation around binding > more granulary/privacy-invasive APIs to Web sites and applications > (beyond infobar and modial dialogs), and I'm hoping we can design APIs > in a way that enables this innovation; this includes designing APIs that > minimize data collection and transmission as much as possible. > > Dom > > -- Wojciech Masłowski Engeneering CORE Wrocław Opera Software ASA http://www.opera.com
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2011 13:15:44 UTC