[webkit-dev] Proposal: Remove Battery Status API code

[Simon Fraser]

I support the proposal to remove.

Simon

> On Oct 30, 2016, at 5:14 PM, Brady Eidson <beidson at 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