- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 08:13:08 +0200
On Thu, 05 May 2011 00:12:06 +0200, Bjartur Thorlacius
<svartman95 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/3/11, Cameron Heavon-Jones <cmhjones at gmail.com> wrote:
>> There are a number of resources which are thought of having an
>> 'application' scope which may make sense to be collated into a
>> single manifest and with the ability for an agent to manage it as
>> such.
>>
> Yeah, if a single entity edits and signs multiple resources, it's
> unreasonable to trust one but not another.
If I understand correctly, I disagree. I might trust a given entity
sometimes, or with some kinds of information, without wanting to simply
say "sure whatever you want". That's probably for the "hard-to-use mode"
in the UI, but I think it's legitimate. In practice, even given something
as simple as twitter's geolocation request I *sometimes* allow it to know
where I am and sometimes don't.
I understand that complicating the UI for this makes the simple things
hard, which is wrong. But the complicated things should be possible - and
given the current trend in privacy requirements in Europe, it's probably a
good idea to make it at least *possible* to do something more detailed
than the *all or nothing* approach for those service providers who want to
differentiate by allowing for a more graded approach and the users who
want to take advantage of that.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle fran?ais -- hablo espa?ol -- jeg l?rer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2011 23:13:08 UTC