- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 11:36:52 +0100
- To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Cc: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:25 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> > wrote: >> Anne, your first link doesn't say that the approach was abandoned; it >> shows that in the notifications case, you have also given up on finding a >> better alternative. > > With notifications it's especially hard to associate a permission grant with > a user action, because the whole point of notifications is that they occur > in the absence of a user action or even user attention. I assume that's why > they gave up trying to find a better solution for notifications. This is exactly right. (We had a solution of sorts of an in-viewport notification that you could grant elevated privileges to become a system notification, but nobody was keen on implementing that.) > It's unclear why the same would apply to "device access permissions". Agreed entirely. >> The second link is Roc's opinion; I respect that opinion, but disagree >> with the conclusion. > > :-) FWIW, I don't think it's just opinion. I see it more as a summary of some hard learned lessons. Among others, from Flash and Java as I mentioned in my post. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Sunday, 8 September 2013 10:37:20 UTC