W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2009

[whatwg] Installed Apps

From: Michael Davidson <mpd@google.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 21:44:03 -0700
Message-ID: <63c0fecb0907282144j11843e0t247f526441796ae3@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Boris Zbarsky<bzbarsky at mit.edu> wrote:
> I don't think it is, no. ?Taking a picture is a one-time activity; the user
> knows exactly what he's getting into. ?And once the picture is taken, no
> more picture-taking until the user says so explicitly.

FYI, this is not the case. Flash camera control is per-site, not
per-use. (Gmail video chat does not request permission to use the
camera every time you do a chat.)

> Note that you could write a Firefox extension that outlives the browser
> today. ?Just include a binary component that starts a separate process.

I didn't realize this. So you think that everything on
addons.mozilla.org is vetted enough to not include malware? Do you
think the existing FF install dialog gives enough warning that an
extension could outlive the browser process? A whitelist of domains
that are allowed to install apps without scary permission dialogs
would be okay with me. Vendors could decide whether mail.google.com is
trustworthy or not.

> Really, it sounds like you want something more akin to a Prism app [1] than
> anything else. ?You don't _actually_ want to run gmail in a browser window.
> ?You just want to deliver it over http:// and leverage a browser-like thing
> on the other end for rendering it, right?

We'd like to not have to maintain two Gmail codebases, one for
installed usage and one for everyone else. Ideally the same code can
be used in an internet cafe and on the machine of someone who agrees
to install Gmail as an app. Prism might be similar to what we'd like.

Michael
Received on Tuesday, 28 July 2009 21:44:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:14 UTC