On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 11:54:17AM -0300, Martin Langhoff wrote: > 2008/7/7 Martin Dengler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: [...] > > http://dev.laptop.org/~mdengler/launch-by-click-ie.jpg [...] > I think that the dialogue you captured is the "seam" people are > talking about :-)
Cool. I was just querying the definition of "seamless". I'm sure sensible people are thinking about this. I don't mean/imply otherwise. I just wanted to know whether this had been written down, and whether we were to know the rationales. > a document-triggered launch (using JEBs) is good enough, and I think > it can be deemed reasonably safe. That's what Ivan points out I conflated (run-existing-with-input vs. run-new-with-dodgy-downloaded-stuff). Like I said, 1) I doubt users understand this distinction; and 2) the disctinction isn't that useful anymore[1] anyway. Sensible people will argue that "document-triggered launch" is "reasonably safe", and such - I just didn't know we got to that decision from "seamful". I don't disagree with (what I imagine is) the implied UI (I certainly think we need to eliminate the "abyss" that was referred to, where it exists). > So I don't think there's a major problem here. Neither do I. I didn't intend the tone of my email to be unproductively argumentative. I'm sure the summary-ish content will/can be clarified, and I'm sure it's not important enough to clarify *right*now* (before feature freeze, etc.). > cheers, > > > > m Martin 1. it's not clear to me why applications accepting powerful input that we don't normally think of as "executable code" should be trusted to run-existing-with-dodgy-input more than the run-new-with-dodgy-downloaded-code is ((un)trusted).
pgp6VpHbtBOMd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
