W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > September 2010

Re: Updated Policy Requirements draft

From: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 22:51:18 +0200
To: <dom@w3.org>
CC: <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <01C2CAA5-8F1C-464D-9C6F-80A66C26A6F7@nokia.com>
Dom

I agree with all of your comments below.

What would be most helpful is proposing concrete examples, though making editorial changes is welcome as well.

Thanks for taking the time to review.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia



On Sep 6, 2010, at 11:40 AM, ext Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:

> Hi Frederick,
> 
> Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 17:16 +0200, Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com a
> écrit :
>> Please review and discuss any suggested changes on the list.
>> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/policy-reqs/
> 
> I've finally found the time to read the updated document — I think is a
> clear improvement from the previous version.
> 
> A few thoughts in case we still want to work on this document (rather
> than the policy work itself):
> * I like the 3-levels organization, but would rename them to
>  - User consent
>  - Packaged permissions
>  - Delegated control
> The reason for this is that we would then have each of these sections
> talk about something similar (the policy mechanism) rather than having
> two of them talking about the object of the mechanism, and the third
> talking about the mechanism. I'm also proposing control instead of
> authority since the title of the document talks about control.
> 
> * relatedly, section 3 (trusted widget or application) says that trust
> can be established in various ways (signature, reputation, etc); this
> could be applied to Web sites as well, and so isn't widget-specific
> 
> * I would strengthen the usefulness in the entreprise environment of
> what is described in section 4 (as we discussed in the London F2F),
> possibly with some concrete examples.
> 
> Time permitting, I'm willing to take a stab at making these changes (and
> other more editorial) if you think that's worthwhile.
> 
> Dom
> 
Received on Tuesday, 7 September 2010 20:51:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:12 GMT