Re: Breaking down proposal related to constraints

On 27/11/13 19:10, cowwoc wrote:
> 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.

Hi Gili,

I think what you need to do is to generate more interest for your idea 
on this mail list. There have been quite few comments so far. My guess 
would be that you would need to make a more concrete proposal on how 
'the browser to "sanitize"´ should work.

In this case we did file bugs since Jan-Ivar's proposal had already 
gotten a lot of attention and feedback - that is not the case (yet) for 
your proposal.

>
> 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 Thursday, 28 November 2013 09:00:13 UTC