- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 10:09:04 -0800
- To: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 7 December 2012 09:43, Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com> wrote: > Instead of a deviceId, I want to use a deviceIndex This would ensure that identifier stability exists only for the duration of a session. How would you propose that removed/disabled devices be handled? > I think this is far easier to spec, Yes. But only marginally. > less prone to fingerprinting, No. It's identical. > and maintains almost all of the important use-cases. That loses what I perceive to be the main advantage of having a persistent identifier: namely that I can configure an application to use the device that I prefer and that it will use that device each time that I return. I don't see there being any significant advantage to this other than the ability to control whether you get the same device or a different device when you ask a second time. That's an improvement over status quo, but not an especially compelling one.
Received on Friday, 7 December 2012 18:09:37 UTC