ISSUE-2, was: Feedback on the ping="" attribute

Boris,

thanks for the pointer and the feedback; I have added a separate issue 
for tracking the discussion about the UI requirement.

BR, Julian

(Citing the full mail for Tracker)

Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> 
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> I agree that ping="" should be made visible to users. Indeed, the spec 
>> explicitly makes that a SHOULD, going far outside its usual boundary 
>> of not specifying user interface requirements.
> 
> For what it's worth, this thread sparked some discussion at
> <http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.apps.firefox/browse_thread/thread/a8469770c8f9fe52/a014d681071eb449#a014d681071eb449>. 
> 
> 
> The current state of things seems to be that creating a UI for this that 
> would actually mean something to users without at the same time being 
> completely in your face isn't really all that feasible.  For example, 
> most users never look at the status bar when hovering over a link.
> 
> There will likely end up being an extension or something that will flag 
> pings in the status bar for those who truly care, of course.  I would be 
> very surprised if no one creates one.
> 
> As far as the default behavior goes, the current approach seems likely 
> to be to provide no UI indication, and possibly to only allow pings to 
> URIs that are same-host with the originating page (note same-host, and 
> not same-origin, though that might end up changing too, of course).  And 
> there would be preference UI to disable this behavior altogether, 
> naturally.
> 
>> Actually we did consider UI at the time (I was involved in the 
>> discussions). I would be interested in hearing details about the idea 
>> I suggested above, namely of putting the domain names of the hosts to 
>> be pinged in brackets after the link's own URI in the status bar:
>>
>>    http://www.example.com/foo/bar (tracked by example.net)
> 
> That's one of the possibilities talked about in the thread above.
> 
> -Boris
>