Re: Breaking down proposal related to constraints

Stefan,

I'd like to get to a point where I can open a bug to track my own 
proposal (a mechanism for "sanitizing" Javascript functions to remove 
the risk of fingerprinting). I haven't really received sufficient 
feedback for it. Adam liked it, Martin did not (though the reason was 
vague). I responded to Martin's post but got no reply.

I would appreciate your advise on getting more feedback for it.

Thanks,
Gili

On 27/11/2013 8:24 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote:
> Jan-Ivar recently submitted a proposal related to constraints [1]. The
> proposal was really three different proposals in one:
>
> 1. "Don't violate WebIDL": The core of this proposal is to use WebIDL
> dictionaries for Constraints. The effect (apart from making speccing
> simpler) is that unknown mandatory constraints will succeed. To allow
> the app to control a way to probe the UA for which constraints it knows
> is added.
>
> 2. "Don't leak": It is proposed that the permission prompt is always
> launched when getUserMedia is called (even if no device matches the
> mandatory constraints).
>
> 3. "New syntax": A new syntax for constraints is proposed (which moves
> away from the mandatory/optional language).
>
> In order to make it easier to detect if there is consensus for making
> any of the proposed changes we ask people to post their thoughts on the
> individual proposals, with appropriate subject, rather than on all in
> the same mail. This will make it easier to track the discussion.
>
> To make it easier to track decisions we have opened bugs:
>
> "Bug 23933 - Proposal: Change constraints to use WebIDL dictionaries" [2]
> "Bug 23934 - Proposal: Always launch permission prompt to avoid leakage" [3]
> "Bug 23935 - Proposal: New syntax for constraints" [4]
>
> And to those who have already responded: your input will be regarded.
>
> Stefan for the chairs
>
>
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2013Nov/0161.html
> [2] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23933
> [3] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23934
> [4] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23935
>

Received on Wednesday, 27 November 2013 18:10:03 UTC