On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 1:33:06 AM UTC-5, Peter Dolanjski wrote:
> Thanks for taking the time to provide thorough feedback.
>
> 3) For Windows Vista, I don't see where the fire is. I realize that it has
> > a vastly smaller user base, but it is close to Window 7 code base and API
> > wise.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 3:05 AM, wrote:
> My point for the above paragraph is that even if Mozilla stops security
> updates for ESR 52, these computers will still need to get around on the
> Internet. These machines will still need to do log ins and banking. The world
> isn't the same as back
The geolocation API allows web pages to request the user's geolocation,
drawing from things like GPS on mobile, and doing WiFi / IP based
geolocation on desktop.
Due to the privacy risks associated with this functionality, I would like
to propose that we restrict this functionality to secure conte
I have reviewed the charter and the current set of deliverables. The
work appears to be proceeding reasonably (pragmatically, with many
members/implementers including Apple and Google) and reasonably
minimally scoped. There is also the companion Second Screen Community
Group which appears to be use
On 2016-10-21 3:49 PM, Richard Barnes wrote:
> The geolocation API allows web pages to request the user's geolocation,
> drawing from things like GPS on mobile, and doing WiFi / IP based
> geolocation on desktop.
>
> Due to the privacy risks associated with this functionality, I would like
> to pr
I have reviewed the revised charter and list of deliverables. The
work appears to be proceeding reasonably (pragmatically, with many
members/implementers including Apple, Google, and Microsoft) and reasonably
scoped. There is mention of a Community Group, but no link to a CG in
particular. Perhaps
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> On 2016-10-21 3:49 PM, Richard Barnes wrote:
>> The geolocation API allows web pages to request the user's geolocation,
>> drawing from things like GPS on mobile, and doing WiFi / IP based
>> geolocation on desktop.
>>
>> Due to the privacy r
Ekr,
This sounds to me like there are sufficient reasons to formally object
to this charter, and as Martin points out, a special case of IoT/WoT
(with additional concerns!).
David,
Thus I too think we should formally object, link to our previous
formal objection of the WoT charter (since nearly
On 10/21/2016 3:11 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> Does this mean that we'd be breaking one in 5 geolocation requests as a
> result of this? That seems super high. :(
Agreed. For example, my understanding is that this will break
http://www.nextbus.com/ (and thus http://www.nextmuni.com/ ) location
a
9 matches
Mail list logo