- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:26:43 +0200
- To: "David-Sarah Hopwood" <david-sarah@jacaranda.org>, public-script-coord@w3.org
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 05:00:40 +0200, David-Sarah Hopwood <david-sarah@jacaranda.org> wrote: > Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >> I think the disconnect you're seeing is this: some weigh the costs of >> optional behavior as greater than the hypothetical benefit of someday >> removing a "bad" feature. Bad features don't really harm anything but >> our sense of taste. > > Bad features hurt security. (I find it somewhat incredible that the > effect of bad features on sceurity, and that effect as a motivation for > actively > removing them, has hardly been mentioned in this thread.) Maybe not everyone is aware of the issue? Certainly not all bad features are bad for security. (Though it's hard to tell, since bad is somewhat subjective. :-)) -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 13 October 2009 07:27:25 UTC