- From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 17:30:43 +0000
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- CC: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 2013-10-28 18:05, Martin Thomson wrote: > I think that the state machine should be something like this: > > * -> none : ok, no consent > * -> noaccess : no consent > noaccess -> peeridentity : consent > noaccess -> full : consent > peeridentity -> full : forbidden > full -> peeridentity -> ok, no consent > > The only thing that really concerns me is how the browser indicates > that noaccess is not available to the site. Assuming that this > creep-out issue isn't that significant. There are some interesting UX > issues that arise around that. I can think of many approaches: > borders (potentially problematic), the word "preview" as a watermark > over the video (no idea what to do for audio...), etc... Do we really think that the average user would be able to understand different levels of (essentially) access to a camera or microphone? And with the current UIs, would we not get to a click through behavior? E.g. the site first asks for "peeridentity"-access, the user clicks "accept", the site upgrades and the user gets a new prompt and does not read/understand the difference and just clicks accept again? > >
Received on Monday, 28 October 2013 17:31:12 UTC