- From: Daniel W. Connolly <connolly@beach.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 22:00:47 -0500
- To: Robert Hazeltine <rhazltin@bacall.nepean.uws.edu.au>
- Cc: Walter Ian Kaye <boo@best.com>, www-html@w3.org
In message <Pine.SUN.3.91.960223194702.3485B-100000@bacall.nepean.uws.edu.au>, Robert Hazeltine writes: >On Thu, 22 Feb 1996, Walter Ian Kaye wrote: > >> Well, presumably any UA supporting this would also have a set of >> preferences such as the following: >> | [X] Name | >> | ( ) First name only | >> | (*) Full name | >> | [X] Email address | >No.... > >Let's not presume anything of the sort... > >This is the most pernicious piece of crap that I have seen in a long time. >We fought long and hard in Australia to get rid of the Australia Card and >this is a permutation of the same theme. > >If you are naive enough not to see the implications of this, move over and >let others overtake. Enough of this sort of innuendo, Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt already! Cite your sources! Give evidence! Present your argument! Phil's draft was a bit brief, but there's nothing wrong with the mechanism. All it does is save ths user a little typing: it allows the browser to fill in the same info the user gave last time. Just like Quicken's QuickFill (TM?) feature. In my original write-up [1], I was a little more careful with the privacy concerns (for example, be careful with HIDDEN fields.) and I included a discussion of rights of various parties. But if you have a REAL problem with the proposed mechanism, please make your argument plainly. [1] Proposals for Gathering Consumer Demographics http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Demographics/Proposals.html $Id: Proposals.html,v 1.2 1995/11/06 20:05:28 macarthr Exp $ Dan
Received on Friday, 23 February 1996 22:01:11 UTC