- From: Diego La Monica (IWA/HWG) <d.lamonica@webprofession.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:27:02 +0200
- To: "Kornel Lesinski" <kornel@geekhood.net>
- Cc: "Robert Burns" <rob@robburns.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <2139b1d0706241427t78a8d1e2s8709ffe425c289c6@mail.gmail.com>
Maybe both that this issue was already defined in the past messages (in this case sorry but i miss it) or I'm in wrong, but the phrase "API that exposes the history and allows pages to add to it to prevent breaking the back button" (section 4. APIs < http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/html5/html4-differences/Overview.html#apis>) makes some privacy violation for the user navigation preferences. Maybe that someone goes on a political site, after on other sport site and after on the Average Joe's Web Site that gather information about the complete user navigation history. I think is better to describe that point as: "API that exposes the history *for the same domain* and allows pages to add to it to prevent breaking the back button". That's all. Again, sorry if this issue had been already discussed in the past! --- Diego La Monica W3C HTML WG for IWA/HWG IWA Italy Member http://www.iwa.it http://diegolamonica.info 2007/6/24, Kornel Lesinski <kornel@geekhood.net>: > > > On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:02:42 +0100, Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com> wrote: > > > 4) for all of the dropped attributes, we need to immediately explain > > what the alternatives authors will use (e.g., accesskey, td@scope). > > > > 5) the 'style' attribute issue just raised will cause great concern in > > the population we release this to. Heavy-handed moves like that will > > create a bad name for HTML5 before we can even get some consensus > > amongst ourselves. > > I agree. I was about to raise an issue about lack of rationale for > dropping accesskey (which BTW I think should be limited to digits only > rather than being dropped). > > Perhaps this document should omit elements/attributes that are still > disputed or mark on which there isn't a final decision yet. > > -- > regards, Kornel Lesinski > >
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 04:32:19 UTC