W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-identity@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Last call for public comments on Web Crypto charter

From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 12:21:28 +0100
Cc: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, "Mark Watson" <watsonm@netflix.com>, "public-identity@w3.org" <public-identity@w3.org>
Message-Id: <62B18055-DE76-4A1F-8013-68AF932EC404@w3.org>
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
On 2011-11-20, at 16:47 +0100, Harry Halpin wrote:

> The reason why we try to have explicit scoping in the charter is because
> that:
> 1) IP for W3C RFF is scoped to the charter originally.

It's a little more complicated:  commitments are made to the recommendations that eventually result from the process.  As those documents typically don't exist initially, companies typically evaluate the scope in the charter as a good proxy.  Therefore, having a reasonably narrow charter early on tends to be a good idea.

> 2) To prevent the group from going down long, winding paths - so the chairs
> can rely on the charter to say "out of scope".


>> In identifying use-cases, the group shall consider the primary objective
>> of meeting the schedule outlined below and may therefore exclude use-cases
>> requiring capabilities expected to cause excessive schedule risk. As
>> guidance it is expected that access control beyond the same-origin policy,
>> management and validation of certificates and device-specific access to
>> keying material."

The last sentence here seems incomplete. " is out of scope"?
Received on Monday, 21 November 2011 11:21:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:00:47 UTC