W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > June 2012

Re: Today's call: summary on user agent compliance

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 21:26:53 +0200
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Cc: Tamir Israel <tisrael@cippic.ca>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Message-ID: <1560492.0z9vcvSBTP@hegel.sophia.w3.org>
On Thursday 07 June 2012 13:08:08 Tamir Israel wrote:
> I think this raises a very valid point, which extends well beyond
> the IE  default scenario. Allowing any point in the chain to
> second guess signals that are facially valid,  but assert
> compliance. This could be problematic, no?

Only if the decision remains silent and uncommunicated. If I second 
guess something and tell the other side NACK, there is nothing 
misleading to it. The problem is the semantically loaded use of 
"compliance" where it means "privacy enhancing" instead of 
"implements all the SHOULDS and MUSTS of the Specification". 

Rigo 
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2012 19:27:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:30 UTC