Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > > > Having the site just do it seems like better UI to me. > > Perhaps, for some users, but I would like to be notified every single time > such a decision is made. Nothing in the UA stops the UA from notifying you. -- Ian Hickson U+10

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > > Having the site just do it seems like better UI to me. > > > > Perhaps, for some users, but I would like to be notified every single > > time such a decision is made. > > Nothing in the UA stops the UA from

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Ian Hickson wrote: That's why user's can select "Never for this site" (or equivalent), so they're not prompted each time. Having the site just do it seems like better UI to me. Perhaps, for some users, but I would like to be notified every single time such a decision is made. I find it really ba

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:03:44 + (UTC), Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > Instead of a password, the bank issues you with a hardware device that > computes a one-time password that changes every minute. Which changes the security to a physical se

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > > > > > > > My bank uses one-shot passwords for web access > > How does that work? Are you issued a new password every single time you > login? How on earth do you remember it if it's always changing? Instead of a password, the bank issues you with

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen wrote: On 29 Mar 2005 at 11:01, James Graham wrote: Mikko Rantalainen wrote: My bank uses one-shot passwords for web access How does that work? Are you issued a new password every single time you login? How on earth do you remember it if it's always changing? Whi

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On 29 Mar 2005 at 11:01, James Graham wrote: > Mikko Rantalainen wrote: > > > My bank uses one-shot passwords for web access > > Which seems to be an ideal use-case for the autocomplete attribute... Indeed, I've recently asked one of my banks to add autocomplete=off because there is no point i

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, James Graham wrote: > > True. But it is a much better use case than the one that is currently in > the spec. Ian, can we change the use case to mention some sort of > one-time password rather than the contrived nuclear weapon example? It > might even encourage people to imp

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Mikko Rantalainen wrote: > > Banks that *require* that UA supports autocomplete don't really > understand the problem. (Or they understand the problem but don't want > to fix it, instead they simply try to hide the problem.) Fair enough. > WF2 shouldn't require UAs to sup

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Mikko Rantalainen wrote: James Graham wrote: Mikko Rantalainen wrote: My bank uses one-shot passwords for web access Which seems to be an ideal use-case for the autocomplete attribute... But in this case, the autocomplete isn't a *security* feature (though my point is, it should never be conside

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Mikko Rantalainen wrote: WF2 shouldn't require UAs to support this feature. Just a note that some institutions insanely want this feature is enough. It is not required anymore if I read the draft correctly. -- Anne van Kesteren

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

James Graham wrote: Mikko Rantalainen wrote: My bank uses one-shot passwords for web access Which seems to be an ideal use-case for the autocomplete attribute... But in this case, the autocomplete isn't a *security* feature (though my point is, it should never be considered a security feature). I

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Mikko Rantalainen wrote: My bank uses one-shot passwords for web access Which seems to be an ideal use-case for the autocomplete attribute... -- "But if science you say still sounds too deep, Just do what Beaker does, just shrug and 'Meep!'" -- Dr. Bunsen Honeydew & Beaker of Muppet Labs

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Lachlan Hunt wrote: Ian Hickson wrote: Web authors have, IMHO, a legitimate reason to try to protect their users from mis-configured public terminals. This issue could be addressed by making user agents much easier to configure for public terminals. eg. The user agent vendor could provide It's n

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Matthew Thomas wrote: > > > > That won't work either. If Microsoft don't implement it in their next > > release, then banks won't work with that release of IE -- because that > > release will have negligible market share at that point, and users > > won't upgrade to it if i

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Ian Hickson wrote: >... On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Matthew Thomas wrote: >... > That's why I say the only way to kill autocomplete="off" in the > > short term is to convince Microsoft to de-implement it. That won't work either. If Microsoft don't implement it in their next release, then banks won't work

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Matthew Thomas wrote: > > > >- Organisations excercising user-hostile behaviour to exclude a large > > portion of their users either give in to the pressure. > > It's not a large portion of their users. For most banking sites, I > suspect the *only* browser which the

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Lachlan Hunt wrote: ... - Both users and user agent vendors complain to the organisation about not allowing them access. They already tried that, and it didn't work. (Don't bother complaining in that bug report -- it's four years old, a

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > > > a. Allow users to use autocomplete on all sites, but don't let users > > use bank sites at all, or > > > > b. Allow sites to specify when autocomplete should be unavailable, and > > let users use their bank sites, > > c. Allow sites to sp

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Ian Hickson wrote: On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: # Support for the attribute *should* be enabled by default... Ok, I changed the must to a should. But I left the bit about not making it trivially disablable. Thank you, but I don't understand why making it trivially disableable could no

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, [UTF-8] Olav Junker Kjær wrote: > > Therefore the spec has to *describe* and *allow* the currently > implemented behavior, but does not have to *mandate* it. > > So the spec could describe the meaning of the autocomplete attribute and > then, without any "should" or "must"'s

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > I recommend at least moving that statement to the note at the end of the > section, perhaps changing it to something like this: > > # A UA may allow the user to disable support for this attribute. Support > # for the attribute *should* be enabled by de

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

This issue seem to be sensitive, since it concerns the balance of power between the user, the UA, the page author, the spec writer, and The Banks. Since it already clear how UA's are going to implement this feature, the issue is just to choose the most balanced language in the spec. The Banks a

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Ian Hickson wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Matthew Raymond wrote: Actually, now that I think about it, why do we need to have a spec saying that it's not depreciated or that it should be non-trivial to deactivate if the banks are going to blackmail UAs to support it? Because to be useful, specs have

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Olav Junker Kjær wrote: > > This could easily be solved by keeping the name "autocomplete" but > redefine its sematics as indicating that the input data is sensitive. > (the recommended default UI in UA's that support autocompletion would > still be as described in the spec

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Henri Sivonen wrote: On Mar 21, 2005, at 16:54, Matthew Raymond wrote: If banks force them to implement a specific attribute in a specific way, fine, but don't force user agents to do it that way as a matter of spec > compliance. Then let's just put in hidden prefs for disabling it and be quiet abo

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Henri Sivonen wrote: Like Hixie said, documenting the reality lets implementors know what the real world requires to be implemented. Then let's just put in hidden prefs for disabling it and be quiet about it so the clueless banks don't notice. Documentation of the |autocomplete| attribute was

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Mar 21, 2005, at 16:54, Matthew Raymond wrote: Actually, now that I think about it, why do we need to have a spec saying that it's not depreciated or that it should be non-trivial to deactivate if the banks are going to blackmail UAs to support it? Why support blackmail through our specifi

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

i need to better articulate what i had in mind for a "sensitiveinput" attribute to form or form elements: Let's forget about "autocomplete" for a second, and focus on a different specific feature, which is "saving passwords". Today, all browsers ask you whether or not you wish to save passwords o

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Olav Junker KjÃr wrote: If I understand correctly, your objection against "autocomplete" is that it specifies UI behavior rather than semantic information about the data (like a "sensitiveinput" attribute would). Yes, that and the fact that it provides control of a user agent feature to an author

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Ian Hickson wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > That's no reason to give in to their blackmail. If a bank says "either you support autocomplete, or we won't allow your users to access our site", then the browser vendor has no choice. ... Remove "... and the ability to disable support

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Olav Junker Kjær wrote: Lachlan Hunt wrote: Then, please at least deprecate it. If it's only being defined to help with interopable implementations, that's fine, but it's use should be discouraged as much as possible, therefore it should be deprecated. If I understand correctly, your objection a

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

James Graham wrote: Lachlan Hunt wrote: Then, please at least deprecate it. If it's only being defined to help with interopable implementations, that's fine, but it's use should be discouraged as much as possible, therefore it should be deprecated. What the WHATWG spec says on this matter is ir

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Lachlan Hunt wrote: > Then, please at least deprecate it. If it's only being defined to help > with interopable implementations, that's fine, but it's use should be > discouraged as much as possible, therefore it should be deprecated. If I understand correctly, your objection against "autocompl

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:08:29 + (UTC), Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It would also make > any site using the feature non-conformant, which is pointless: how does using a deprecated feature make a site non-conformant? > > # The off value means that the UA must not remember that fiel

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > > > The "autocomplete" attribute is already implemented in user agents. > > There's nothing we can do about it. I included it in the spec simply > > so that it is at least defined somewhere, instead of being just > > something people have to Know Abo

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Lachlan Hunt wrote: Ian Hickson wrote: On Sat, 12 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: I realise I may be a little late with this issue, since WF2 seems to be fairly stable, but never the less I would like to note my objection to the inclusion of the autocomplete attribute [1]. The "autocomplete" attri

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Ian Hickson wrote: On Sat, 12 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: I realise I may be a little late with this issue, since WF2 seems to be fairly stable, but never the less I would like to note my objection to the inclusion of the autocomplete attribute [1]. The "autocomplete" attribute is already imple

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005, Chris Holland wrote: > > How about this. Instead of an autocomplete attribute to specific form > elements, how about an attribute that is less specific about > instructing the user agent what to do: > > sensitiveinput="yes" > > we could place it over a form element or an inpu

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > I realise I may be a little late with this issue, since WF2 seems to be > fairly stable, but never the less I would like to note my objection to > the inclusion of the autocomplete attribute [1]. The "autocomplete" attribute is already implemented in

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Chris Holland wrote: > How about this. Instead of an autocomplete attribute to specific form elements, how about an attribute that is less specific about instructing the user agent what to do: sensitiveinput="yes" ... That is more elegant. However, everything I said about autocomplete="no" would s

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Chris Holland wrote: How about this. Instead of an autocomplete attribute to specific form elements, how about an attribute that is less specific about instructing the user agent what to do: sensitiveinput="yes" we could place it over a form element or an input element. Why inventing something new

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

How about this. Instead of an autocomplete attribute to specific form elements, how about an attribute that is less specific about instructing the user agent what to do: sensitiveinput="yes" we could place it over a form element or an input element. >From here, here's what we do: the main issue

Re: [whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Lachlan Hunt wrote: ... Because autocomplete is a user agent feature designed to assist the user with filling out forms, the decision for whether or not to use it should lie with the user. You should also keep in mind that a user agent should act on behalf of the user at all times. ... I fully sup

[whatwg] [WF2] Objection to autocomplete Attribute

Hi, I realise I may be a little late with this issue, since WF2 seems to be fairly stable, but never the less I would like to note my objection to the inclusion of the autocomplete attribute [1]. Because autocomplete is a user agent feature designed to assist the user with filling out forms, the