[whatwg] Proposal for IsSearchProviderInstalled / AddSearchProvider
ian at hixie.ch
Fri Dec 16 14:54:15 PST 2011
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Adam Shannon wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 18:39, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 May 2011, Adam Shannon wrote:
> >> I don't like having the only barrier between changing the default
> >> search engine for a user's browser be a single dialog box. This list
> >> (and others) have repeatedly found that dialogs don't work and users
> >> skip past them.
> >> Think of the non-techy user who simply clicks yes to evil.com's
> >> request to change default search provider. Will they even know what
> >> that means? Will they care at the time of the dialog? How will they
> >> revert back?
> >> I'd rather see UA's implement better controls on their end than see
> >> an API which could be largely abused. (Drag and drop browser controls
> >> over tons of sites asking for permission to be the default.)
> > I agree. Note that the spec doesn't say there should be a dialog box
> > at all; it's left entirely up to the UAs.
> Perhaps it would be better for the group to send a proposal for a UI (or
> at least guidelines) that's acceptable both from a realistic usability
> and security standpoint?
If anyone would like to make some UI proposals on the wiki that would
certainly be a helpful thing to do, sure.
On Tue, 17 May 2011, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> Then why add an API when we've already got (IMO superior) declarative
In the case of adding the API to the spec, because it's already
implemented. As to why it was added to the browsers, no idea.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg