- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 09:06:43 -0800
- To: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>
- Cc: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 5 December 2013 18:11, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com> wrote: >> Refering to the current UX in Firefox, what I think Jan-Ivar should do >> is put the gUM icon in place without the hanger. If the user selects >> the icon, open the doorhanger with a note: "This site has requested >> access to devices that you don't have." There's no need for buttons >> here, which would imply action, doorhangers disappear when they lose >> focus, which should be enough > > > Yeah, that's probably what I'd do if we went this way. I could also call the > error callback after a random number of seconds, e.g. 1-5 seconds. Just > enough variability so an app cannot tell the difference between camera > absence and user rejection. Come to think of it, I'd allow the user to deny here, following Adam's advice. And I'm not sure that the timeout helps much. If the user really does have the missing camera, opening the doorhanger, seeing the request, and attaching the camera is possible. The key though is that the doorhanger wouldn't be open unless the user acted. If a site is going to ask impossible questions, it should expect only the absolute minimum of user-visible activity. The site can, as always, run its own timers and provide notifications in content at its discretion.
Received on Friday, 6 December 2013 17:07:12 UTC