- From: jan-ivar via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 03:28:14 +0000
- To: public-media-capture-logs@w3.org
> If requesting access to the device doesn't imply changing the stored permissions, I think we have consistent specifications (and agreement on intended behavior). @alvestrand I think I see what you mean now, that by saying we skip the check for permission when a device is already open, we avoid talking about any access implied by a successful request, or the scope of such implied access. But I worry we need to be explicit about this implied access, or people will get confused. I've used your "access" term above, but I don't think people will get it. "Permission" and "access" are synonymous to most people, and the distinction you're making was too subtle for me until today. It's confusing terminology anyway to say a request can succeed without any permission having been given. Besides, according to @jyasskin : > Getting permission to access/use a thing does not imply that this permission will be "stored". So he says permission is implicit in any successful request, even when never stored, which matches how people talk. What got lost from the February text ("Unless there is a stored permission for the source in question, the given permission is revoked") was the revocation of this implicit "given permission" we got from the request algorithm. I don't know the perfect wording, but without explicitly stating when it must end, it seems unclear - at least to me - whether e.g. Edge's `https` behavior is compliant. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jan-ivar Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-main/issues/387#issuecomment-245164716 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 7 September 2016 03:28:20 UTC