6 ms·

The last thing I want is a webpage being able to access bluetooth, notifications or any sensor data. No, more permission dialogs is also not what I want.

verve_rat 5y ago
Counter point. It would be really great if the web app I work on was able to connect to Bluetooth enabled wands and directly read the RFID tag in the ear of cows as the farmer did things to them (like check if they are pregnant) and record that information in the web app.
- cirrus3 5y ago
  I'm sure that would be great for you, and the app you work on.
xwdv 5y ago
As a dev it’s one of the first things I want. Would really allow for interesting applications.
desikoder 5y ago
> The last thing I want is a webpage being able to access bluetooth, notifications or any sensor data. No, more permission dialogs is also not what I want. And how is having the same developer do it via a native application any different? Permission controls for browser can be managed the same way they are being managed for native apps. In fact, once a web app is allowed to register itself as an app, you will be able to centrally view permissions from your existing permission manager settings in your respective operating system.
- merlinscholz 5y ago
  I get your point, but in my experience it is more common to land on a website with a malicious ad than intentionally download an untrusted app.
  - mpalmer 5y ago
    I don't think they're advocating that any random page you happen to land on has the capability or permissions of an app. I think they're saying that the web app experience should be more aligned and integrated with the native app experience, including installation and granting of permissions.
    - mtomweb 5y ago
      Privacy is worse on native, and we shouldn’t copy that. If others read the section on Bluetooth it outlines how poor native protections are. Full integration of web app settings into the OS is essential for users to be able to control their privacy.
      - the_other 5y ago
        > Privacy is worse on native, and we shouldn’t copy that. When I create a document locally, or copy a photo from my camera to my computer, I'm responsible for how far it leaks, and it's fairly easy to manage and understand. When I create similar data in a web app, I have no control over what happens to it. How is "privacy worse on native"?
        easrng 5y ago
        You're comparing apples to oranges. Trusted local software and trusted web software aren't the issue. The issue is untrusted software. If you run untrusted native software on a (either non-mobile or non-updated) system, it can usually read and potentially exfiltrate all your files. On the other hand, an untrusted web pages can only access and exfiltrate the files you choose to let them access.
        the_other 5y ago
        I understand. Thanks. I think the key here is "trusted". That's the bit that needs work. Vendors need to work on their trust; our industry needs to work on its architectures and business models.
- 6figurelenins 5y ago
  > Permission controls for browser can be managed the same way they are being managed for native apps. They can't evolve the way the latter did. "New API every year or we break your app" is not an option for the web. As a user, what drives me crazy is the absence of "human interface guidelines" and sane local storage. On the other hand, I insist on the freedom to sideload. As a developer, I pine for an application platform that is not a 30-year-old messy abstraction over a 50-year-old operating system. If it can help my layouts on a 5" vs 50" screen, all the better.
aluminum96 5y ago
> more permission dialogs is also not what I want Permission dialogs are a small price to pay for enabling entire categories of applications! For example, consider WebMIDI: there are huge number of web apps that use the new standard, ranging from online DAWs to hardware device management tools (like the new Noise Engineering Imitor Versio firmware tool). It's clear as day that Apple declining to implement these standards is holding back the web, and leading to platform fragmentation. Yes, let's prevent fingerprinting with privacy-protecting implementations, but apps should be able to use these awesome features with permission.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > Permission dialogs are a small price to pay It's huge price to pay considering the number of permissions required, complexity of it all, and potential consequences when a frustrated user just clicks "yes" to all
ptomato 5y ago
yup, I'd pay Apple an additional 20% per iPhone if they promise never to implement this horrible shit for website devs to endlessly badger users about to the end of time.
- go_prodev 5y ago
  Why do you have such little faith in Apple? Apple's not going to just drop in a change that makes you go through popup and notification hell. I'm 100% certain Apple would give users control to enable or disable features on a per site/pwa basis.
  - ptomato 5y ago
    As long as the feature doesn't exist, people have to make websites that work without it. As soon as it does, people will instead switch to obnoxious interstitial screens telling and/or insisting that you enable push notifications or whatever to continue using the thing.
combatentropy 5y ago
I would agree that permission dialogs are not what we want, on page load, as so many websites do. A web app should wait until it needs Geolocation or whatever, before prompting you. It should always follow a user interaction. When you click to use some feature, then it prompts you for the permission. Or an app could have some kind of introductory page where it lists the permissions that it will need, and you click each one that you want to give. Again you do this at your leisure, not upon page load.
- rezonant 5y ago
  This is already how almost all web permissions work, and certainly is true for all new permissions
jdrc 5y ago
Disable them at the browser level. Or better don't use the filthy web at all, there is an app for everything

verve_rat 5y ago

Counter point. It would be really great if the web app I work on was able to connect to Bluetooth enabled wands and directly read the RFID tag in the ear of cows as the farmer did things to them (like check if they are pregnant) and record that information in the web app.

cirrus3 5y ago
I'm sure that would be great for you, and the app you work on.

xwdv 5y ago

As a dev it’s one of the first things I want. Would really allow for interesting applications.

desikoder 5y ago

> The last thing I want is a webpage being able to access bluetooth, notifications or any sensor data. No, more permission dialogs is also not what I want. And how is having the same developer do it via a native application any different? Permission controls for browser can be managed the same way they are being managed for native apps. In fact, once a web app is allowed to register itself as an app, you will be able to centrally view permissions from your existing permission manager settings in your respective operating system.

merlinscholz 5y ago
I get your point, but in my experience it is more common to land on a website with a malicious ad than intentionally download an untrusted app.
- mpalmer 5y ago
  I don't think they're advocating that any random page you happen to land on has the capability or permissions of an app. I think they're saying that the web app experience should be more aligned and integrated with the native app experience, including installation and granting of permissions.
  - mtomweb 5y ago
    Privacy is worse on native, and we shouldn’t copy that. If others read the section on Bluetooth it outlines how poor native protections are. Full integration of web app settings into the OS is essential for users to be able to control their privacy.
    - the_other 5y ago
      > Privacy is worse on native, and we shouldn’t copy that. When I create a document locally, or copy a photo from my camera to my computer, I'm responsible for how far it leaks, and it's fairly easy to manage and understand. When I create similar data in a web app, I have no control over what happens to it. How is "privacy worse on native"?
      - easrng 5y ago
        You're comparing apples to oranges. Trusted local software and trusted web software aren't the issue. The issue is untrusted software. If you run untrusted native software on a (either non-mobile or non-updated) system, it can usually read and potentially exfiltrate all your files. On the other hand, an untrusted web pages can only access and exfiltrate the files you choose to let them access.
        the_other 5y ago
        I understand. Thanks. I think the key here is "trusted". That's the bit that needs work. Vendors need to work on their trust; our industry needs to work on its architectures and business models.
6figurelenins 5y ago
> Permission controls for browser can be managed the same way they are being managed for native apps. They can't evolve the way the latter did. "New API every year or we break your app" is not an option for the web. As a user, what drives me crazy is the absence of "human interface guidelines" and sane local storage. On the other hand, I insist on the freedom to sideload. As a developer, I pine for an application platform that is not a 30-year-old messy abstraction over a 50-year-old operating system. If it can help my layouts on a 5" vs 50" screen, all the better.

aluminum96 5y ago

> more permission dialogs is also not what I want Permission dialogs are a small price to pay for enabling entire categories of applications! For example, consider WebMIDI: there are huge number of web apps that use the new standard, ranging from online DAWs to hardware device management tools (like the new Noise Engineering Imitor Versio firmware tool). It's clear as day that Apple declining to implement these standards is holding back the web, and leading to platform fragmentation. Yes, let's prevent fingerprinting with privacy-protecting implementations, but apps should be able to use these awesome features with permission.

dmitriid 5y ago
> Permission dialogs are a small price to pay It's huge price to pay considering the number of permissions required, complexity of it all, and potential consequences when a frustrated user just clicks "yes" to all

ptomato 5y ago

yup, I'd pay Apple an additional 20% per iPhone if they promise never to implement this horrible shit for website devs to endlessly badger users about to the end of time.

go_prodev 5y ago
Why do you have such little faith in Apple? Apple's not going to just drop in a change that makes you go through popup and notification hell. I'm 100% certain Apple would give users control to enable or disable features on a per site/pwa basis.
- ptomato 5y ago
  As long as the feature doesn't exist, people have to make websites that work without it. As soon as it does, people will instead switch to obnoxious interstitial screens telling and/or insisting that you enable push notifications or whatever to continue using the thing.

combatentropy 5y ago

I would agree that permission dialogs are not what we want, on page load, as so many websites do. A web app should wait until it needs Geolocation or whatever, before prompting you. It should always follow a user interaction. When you click to use some feature, then it prompts you for the permission. Or an app could have some kind of introductory page where it lists the permissions that it will need, and you click each one that you want to give. Again you do this at your leisure, not upon page load.

rezonant 5y ago
This is already how almost all web permissions work, and certainly is true for all new permissions

jdrc 5y ago

Disable them at the browser level. Or better don't use the filthy web at all, there is an app for everything