I support the proposal to remove. Simon
> On Oct 30, 2016, at 5:14 PM, Brady Eidson <beid...@apple.com> wrote: > > > There's code in the tree to support the W3C Battery Status API. > > A recent study showed the extent of the risk (discussion and link to study > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__blog.lukaszolejnik.com_battery-2Dstatus-2Dreadout-2Das-2Da-2Dprivacy-2Drisk_&d=CwICAg&c=Hw-EJUFt2_D9PK5csBJ29kRV40HqSDXWTLPyZ6W8u84&r=gEUmSR3VtC-5Q3Im6T2Js1aXwjJK4RExonGEvDq2twI&m=ZKSbJXtXvUd44zKls9LfZwY1fsH0NRSg8KxOY7clZdI&s=8c9qMq7SAf9mAh8t9oHbJE45_tXRsbZBMid46hd9UXs&e= > ) which led to Mozilla first making the API less precise > (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1124127) but then eventually > removing it altogether (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1313580) > > Apple has never enabled this on their ports, one reason being concern for > abuse in fingerprinting/tracking. > The study seems to be a strong second opinion backing this concern. > Mozilla's actions demonstrate another vendor not seeing the API being useful > enough to outweigh the user concern. > > As one of the voices for Apple's ports I think the above episode further > cements our concern in ever enabling the API. > > As one of the voices for WebKit as a whole I think above episode suggests we > should just remove the code from the tree altogether. > > What to other Apple folks think? What do port maintainers who enable the API > think? > > Thanks, > ~Brady _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev