- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 18:17:06 +0100
- To: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Thursday, May 16, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Alex Russell wrote: > On Thursday, May 16, 2013, Robin Berjon wrote: > > On 16/05/2013 17:33 , Marcos Caceres wrote: > > > On Thursday, May 16, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Alex Russell wrote: > > > > watchPosition() and clearWatch() don't seem to difficult -- > > > > watchPosition() starts an event stream. > > > > > > > > > Right, I thought of the same. But we don't have a standard way on the > > > platform to register for "event streams". That is, neither > > > addEventListener() nor "foo.onwhatever" (EventHandler attribute) are > > > well suited for this because of the need to provide "options". > > > > > > If we're going to redesign Geolocation, we might as well do so in a way that supports good UX and good privacy practices (i.e. not triggering a permission bar/dialog devoid of context) but rather a user-activated control. > > That's one reason I keep advocating for <input type="location">. But the API is still necessary and probably going to need to throw permissions dialogs forever. And that's OK, so long as it's the exception and not the rule. Using an input would certainly be nicer. I guess it's part of a larger discussion. At the moment, we are getting WG's to send their APIs for review to public-script-coord, but maybe we need another group which is more like "public-should-this-really-be-made-declarative-coord@w3.org" ^_^ … or www-tag?
Received on Thursday, 16 May 2013 17:17:37 UTC