- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 22:54:15 +0000 (UTC)
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Adam Shannon wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 18:39, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: > > On Mon, 16 May 2011, Adam Shannon wrote: > >> > >> I don't like having the only barrier between changing the default > >> search engine for a user's browser be a single dialog box. This list > >> (and others) have repeatedly found that dialogs don't work and users > >> skip past them. > >> > >> Think of the non-techy user who simply clicks yes to evil.com's > >> request to change default search provider. Will they even know what > >> that means? Will they care at the time of the dialog? How will they > >> revert back? > >> > >> I'd rather see UA's implement better controls on their end than see > >> an API which could be largely abused. (Drag and drop browser controls > >> over tons of sites asking for permission to be the default.) > > > > I agree. Note that the spec doesn't say there should be a dialog box > > at all; it's left entirely up to the UAs. > > Perhaps it would be better for the group to send a proposal for a UI (or > at least guidelines) that's acceptable both from a realistic usability > and security standpoint? If anyone would like to make some UI proposals on the wiki that would certainly be a helpful thing to do, sure. On Tue, 17 May 2011, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote: > > Then why add an API when we've already got (IMO superior) declarative > markup? In the case of adding the API to the spec, because it's already implemented. As to why it was added to the browsers, no idea. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 16 December 2011 14:54:15 UTC