Re: gUM and persistent permissions

On 29 April 2014 08:38, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote:
> the way user agents manage long term permissions has been
> traditionally left to implementors to determine and innovate on

I think that we can do better here.  An agreement here to not persist
for http origins makes it clear that we don't think that this
specification is suitable for use on unsecured origins.  I'm happy to
weaken that statement if someone comes up with a strong enough use
case, but we've discussed this several times already and there hasn't
been any indication that folks want to persist there.

Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2014 16:45:02 UTC