Re: "Chrome"

It's not at all the case that the chrome populated with content from  
web pages isn't under the browser's control. The browser is the  
application that fetched it and placed it there, and the application  
can choose not to, or choose only to do so according to specific  
rules, etc.

I think the real issue here is the potential for confusion about the  
source of the content. That the content appears inline with what  
users are used to thinking of as chrome -- that is to say, UI  
elements from an application which they have chosen to run -- often  
makes users assume that the content is being provided by the  
application, not the web page.

All elements of chrome are under browser control. It's just that the  
browser populates some of those elements from a website, which may  
not be as trusted (by the user) as the browser.

I think what we want to do is catalog the list of places where chrome  
is populated by web page content and then see if we can find better  
ways of expressing that concept.

cheers,
mike

On 12-Feb-07, at 5:58 PM, Brad Porter wrote:

> Yes, I agree that there are lots of sources for "semantic chrome"  
> and today there's no way to know which presentation elements are  
> browser-controlled vs which aren't.
>
> If the browser is going to say anything about the site at all, then  
> the user needs to have some way of establishing trust with the  
> browser.
>
> Consequently, I think establishing trust between user->browser- 
> controlled-presentation-elements for those presentation elements  
> which make statements about a web site is a prerequisite to pretty  
> much any solution we come up with and therefore must be in scope.
>
> --Brad
>
> michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com wrote:
>> I like the distinction between "window chrome" and "semantic  
>> chrome".  But I think there's a whole spectrum of semantic chrome  
>> sources.  From most to least trusted, all the following can  
>> produce such chrome: OS > base browser > TTP browser plug-in > TTP  
>> script/applet/control > unintentionally activated script/applet/ 
>> control > malware emulating the OS or browser.
>>
>> For example all the things I just listed can generate pop-up  
>> dialogs.  Ideally there's needs to be some contextual information  
>> in the pop-up chrome that tells me its source or gives me  
>> contextual cues about the source's trustworthiness.  In scope or not?
>>
>> From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg- 
>> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Brad Porter
>> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 11:24 AM
>> To: Hal Lockhart
>> Cc: Mike Beltzner; Bob Pinheiro; Mary Ellen Zurko; public-wsc- 
>> wg@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: "Chrome"
>>
>> Your separation between semantic chrome and the desktop visual  
>> chrome is genius.  Given that, I propose two phrases with  
>> definitions:
>>
>> window chrome -- visual elements used by Desktop browsers or the  
>> OS window manager to surround the web page
>>
>> browser-controlled presentation elements -- any user interface  
>> presentation controlled explicitly by the browser and not under  
>> direct web page control
>>
>> --Brad
>>
>> Hal Lockhart wrote:
>>> The key point I tried to make at the F2F was that the definitions  
>>> that most of us would like to use for Chrome represent the way we  
>>> wish browsers work or hope they will work in future. For example,  
>>> a strict separation between what the application can control and  
>>> what the browser controls seems desirable to most of us, but does  
>>> not currently exist, as reported by many sources. The point of  
>>> this comment is that first of all, we need to make this clear in  
>>> our glossary, so as to avoid arguments about current violations.  
>>> Also in evaluating potential definitions, we need to be aware of  
>>> the present/future distinction. Looking at the thread below, I  
>>> believe MEZ and Bob have proposed future definitions, whereas the  
>>> two that Mike found are present definitions. I see the choice as  
>>> being between defining Chrome in purely graphical terms (stuff  
>>> around the edge of the screen) or semantically (stuff from  
>>> browser not web site).  Hal
>>>> -----Original Message----- From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org
>>> [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org]
>>>> On Behalf Of Mike Beltzner Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 10:13  
>>>> AM To: Bob Pinheiro Cc: Mary Ellen Zurko; public-wsc-wg@w3.org  
>>>> Subject: Re: "Chrome" A couple of definitions I found ..: "The  
>>>> interface elements of a browser, or any other program, that  
>>>> create the frame around the window that displays pages." (cite:  
>>>> http://www.chriscassell.net/classes/2001/winter/gdt150/ handouts/ 
>>>> vocabulary.html) "The visible graphical interface features of an  
>>>> application are sometimes referred to as "chrome". They include  
>>>> graphical elements (widgets) that may be used to interact with  
>>>> the program. Common widgets are: windows, buttons, menus, and  
>>>> scroll bars. Larger widgets, such as windows, usually provide a  
>>>> frame or container for the main presentation content such as a  
>>>> web page, email message or drawing. Smaller ones usually act as  
>>>> a user-input tool." (cite:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_interface_chrome#GUI_design)
>>>> I think the salient detail is that chrome is what allows the  
>>>> user to interact with the browser alone from interacting with  
>>>> the web content. Bob's point about the display of chrome being  
>>>> restricted to the browser is also good to keep in mind, and  
>>>> relevant for our
>>> purposes.
>>>> cheers, mike On 12-Feb-07, at 9:44 AM, Bob Pinheiro wrote:
>>>>> I thought the key distinction with regard to "chrome" is that  
>>>>> there are certain areas of the browser window that are solely  
>>>>> under the control of the browser, and not the website being  
>>>>> displayed. So anything displayed in the "chrome" can be assumed  
>>>>> to be coming from the browser itself, and not the website.  
>>>>> However, if some browsers have areas where both the browser and  
>>>>> the website can communicate information, that seems to muddy  
>>>>> the issue. Maybe such areas should have a different name,  
>>>>> reserving "chrome" for those areas where only the browser can  
>>>>> communicate to the user. At 08:16 AM 2/12/2007, Mary Ellen  
>>>>> Zurko wrote:
>>>>>> During our f2f, the discussion about "chrome - what is it"  
>>>>>> came up again. The discussion was part of going over "Poorly  
>>>>>> defined role for chrome". It was a divergence at the time, so  
>>>>>> we decided to take the discussion to the list. See: http:// 
>>>>>> www.w3.org/2007/01/30-wsc-minutes.html "what is chrome?  
>>>>>> diaglog boxes should be included" We'll need the definition of  
>>>>>> Chrome for the Glossary that Tim is pulling together as well.  
>>>>>> What I mean to mean by Chrome are the parts of the window that  
>>>>>> include information that the User agent/Browser is trying to  
>>>>>> communicate to the user, vs the parts where the browser is  
>>>>>> (expected to) faithfully represent what the web site/page is  
>>>>>> trying to communicate to the user. Some areas in some browsers  
>>>>>> currently contain both (for example, the title area including  
>>>>>> both the HTML title and browser identity information). Anyone  
>>>>>> else have a better definition? I also remember people getting  
>>>>>> fixated on the word. If the word itself is getting in the way  
>>>>>> of a concept we consider important, then we can start using  
>>>>>> some other word which we can all agree on. So this might  
>>>>>> instead be an exercise where we agree on the concept first,  
>>>>>> then agree on the word we'll use. [ACTION-132 - Start  
>>>>>> discussion on mailing list to draw chrome items out and get  
>>>>>> analysis completed [on Mary Ellen Zurko - due 2007-02-13].]  
>>>>>> Mez Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office (t/l  
>>>>>> 333-6389) Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation  
>>>>>> Architect
>>>>> --------------------------------------- Bob Pinheiro FSTC  
>>>>> Project Management Bob.Pinheiro@FSTC.org 1 908-654-1939

Received on Monday, 12 February 2007 23:11:25 UTC