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

RE: Policy Requirements draft updated again

From: Nilsson, Claes1 <Claes1.Nilsson@sonyericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 16:31:20 +0200
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, "Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com" <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
CC: "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <6DFA1B20D858A14488A66D6EEDF26AA32D5C1FBBFC@seldmbx03.corpusers.net>
Hi Dom,

I like your reorganization of the document because it is now structured according to the different ways to perform access control and not according to the type of web application.

So +1 for this structure. 

Claes

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-device-apis-request@w3.org [mailto:public-device-apis-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dominique Hazael-Massieux
> Sent: den 9 september 2010 10:12
> To: Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com
> Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org
> Subject: Policy Requirements draft updated again
> 
> Hi,
> 
> As discussed previously, I've taken a (big) stab at reworking the
> policy
> requirements document; you can see the new version at:
> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/policy-reqs/

> 
> In summary, I have:
> * reorganized it around the access control interactions (granular user
> consent, grouped permissions, delegated authority) rather than their
> target (web site/widgets, trusted/non-trusted)
> 
> * I've rewritten the use cases as user stories to make them more
> concrete and more consistent; they are completed with a short analysis
> that explains what the story implies technically
> 
> * I've reorganized the requirements to make them match the user stories
> they are bound with
> 
> * I've moved the security and privacy threats into an appendix
> 
> I think the document could use some illustrations (e.g. screenshots of
> possible interactions mechanisms, or diagrams showing the links between
> the various players in the stories), but this would require more energy
> than I have left :)
> 
> These are rather big and thorough changes; if the result is not up to
> what the group wants, this can easily be reverted to the previous
> version.
> 
> Dom
> 
> 

Received on Friday, 10 September 2010 14:31:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:13 GMT