Messaging API update (was: Messaging API usage)

> I would still be OK with moving ahead with publishing, but maybe it
> makes more sense to make another editing pass if the scope of the work
> still needs clarification even for a group insider :)

Based on yesterday's discussions on the call and per my ACTION-325, I've
reworked slightly the messaging API to clarify its scope and its
intended approach to securing user consent:
http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/messaging/

For instance, the intro now has:
        These APIs complement what sms:, mms:, and mailto: URI schemes
        with:
            * the possibility to attach files to messages,
            * a callback on success / error when a message is sent.

I've removed the "MUST" from security considerations and reworded it in
something that I hope express more clearly the intent that was
discussed.

I've also added an issue in the API definitions to note that we're
working on converging more towards a URI scheme-based approach.

I've also made another change that is possibly more controversial, or at
least not directly aligned with my mandate: I've removed the "From"
field of the *Message interfaces. As far as I can tell, they would be a
pretty big privacy hole compared to the URI scheme model: if that field
would get filled when a message is sent, it would mean that a Web page
would get my email address or phone number when sending a message
through the API!

(if this is too big a change compared to what the group is ready for in
the short timeframe we've discussed, I won't have a problem with
reverting it and adding an issue in the document to note the problem)

Full diff of my changes at
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2009/dap/messaging/Overview.html.diff?r1=1.27&r2=1.31&f=h

Rich, let me know if you see other edits that would help address your
earlier concerns.

Dom

Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 10:23:59 UTC