[whatwg] ISSUE-2, was: Feedback on the ping="" attribute
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Sat Nov 3 01:57:59 PDT 2007
thanks for the pointer and the feedback; I have added a separate issue
for tracking the discussion about the UI requirement.
(Citing the full mail for Tracker)
Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> I agree that ping="" should be made visible to users. Indeed, the spec
>> explicitly makes that a SHOULD, going far outside its usual boundary
>> of not specifying user interface requirements.
> For what it's worth, this thread sparked some discussion at
> The current state of things seems to be that creating a UI for this that
> would actually mean something to users without at the same time being
> completely in your face isn't really all that feasible. For example,
> most users never look at the status bar when hovering over a link.
> There will likely end up being an extension or something that will flag
> pings in the status bar for those who truly care, of course. I would be
> very surprised if no one creates one.
> As far as the default behavior goes, the current approach seems likely
> to be to provide no UI indication, and possibly to only allow pings to
> URIs that are same-host with the originating page (note same-host, and
> not same-origin, though that might end up changing too, of course). And
> there would be preference UI to disable this behavior altogether,
>> Actually we did consider UI at the time (I was involved in the
>> discussions). I would be interested in hearing details about the idea
>> I suggested above, namely of putting the domain names of the hosts to
>> be pinged in brackets after the link's own URI in the status bar:
>> http://www.example.com/foo/bar (tracked by example.net)
> That's one of the possibilities talked about in the thread above.
More information about the whatwg