W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-usable-authentication@w3.org > October 2009

Re: [wsc-ui] some feedback ( LC-2256)

From: <mzurko@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:33:45 +0000
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: public-usable-authentication@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1N1QpV-0003NZ-VG@wiggum.w3.org>

 Dear Anne van Kesteren ,

The Web Security Context Working Group has reviewed the comments you sent
[1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the Web Security Context: User
Interface Guidelines published on 26 Feb 2009. Thank you for having taken
the time to review the document and to send us comments!

The Working Group's response to your comment is included below.

Please review it carefully and let us know by email at
public-usable-authentication@w3.org if you agree with it or not before 30
October 2009. In case of disagreement, you are requested to provide a
specific solution for or a path to a consensus with the Working Group. If
such a consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the opportunity to
raise a formal objection which will then be reviewed by the Director during
the transition of this document to the next stage in the W3C Recommendation


For the Web Security Context Working Group,
Thomas Roessler
W3C Staff Contact

 2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-wsc-ui-20090226/


Your comment on :
> "user agent" -- The draft uses the term "user agent" for conformance  
> levels and uses the term "web user agent" elsewhere. For the kind of  
> requirements the draft makes most other specifications simply use "user
> agent". It would be nice if the draft could align with that. In case
> the  
> deviation is found necessary for some reason it should be consistently 
> used. In section 7.4 the term "browser" is also sometimes used. Is that
> intentional?
> "web page" -- The definition of Web page seems to include that it
> cannot  
> be embedded so I wonder what "top-level Web page" in section 4 means.
> If  
> this document is indeed aimed at browser vendors (and it sure seems
> like  
> it) it might be good to align terminology with HTML5. For what you want
> here the term "top-level browsing context" would be appropriate. Unlike
> "web page" that term is also defined in a lot more detail so that there
> can be no doubt as to what is meant.
> "must not" -- the last paragraph of 7.4.1 has a lowercase must not. I  
> assume this is supposed to be uppercase.
> "chrome" -- technically scrollbars and such are also part of this, but 
> should probably be excluded for most purposes here since positioning  
> something over an element with a scrollbar is fine.
> I also wonder the excessive use of MUST is warranted given that a lot
> of  
> these things are user interface constraints that might not be
> applicable  
> everywhere.

Working Group Resolution (LC-2256):
Thank you for your review.

We consistently use "user agent" now. 

We're staying with the "web page" definition we have, since it's what we
all understand. 

actually the "must not" in the last paragraph of 7.4.1. was not
conformance language; it has been reworked. 

"Chrome" refers to both primary and secondary UI; we've attempted to make
the clearer. 

We've reviewed the MUSTs (and all the recommendations) carefully and think
they're sane. Want to change any in particular, and if so, why?

Received on Friday, 23 October 2009 20:33:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:53:16 UTC