RE: ISSUE-96: Should support for logotypes be a SHOULD or a MAY? [Techniques]

Yes, we should vote separately on primary versus secondary.  I vote
SHOULD for both, mainly because I want to offer current users of
favicons an alternative.

  _____  

From: Ian Fette [mailto:ifette@google.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 2:53 PM
To: McCormick, Mike
Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: ISSUE-96: Should support for logotypes be a SHOULD or a
MAY? [Techniques]


Is that SHOULD for the case of UAs SHOULD display... in either primary
or secondary chrome, or SHOULD for the case of in primary chrome? 

Personally, I vote for 

MAY in primary chrome
and SHOULD in secondary chrome 

and I'm trying to figure out if you're saying SHOULD for both, or just
one?


On 8/10/07, michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com
<michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com> wrote: 


	I vote for SHOULD.  Especially if we do take a strong stance
against
	favicons, we need to offer marketers an alternative and more
secure way
	of visually branding their sites.
	
	-----Original Message-----
	From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org]
	On Behalf Of Web Security Context Working Group Issue Tracker 
	Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 11:52 AM
	To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
	Subject: ISSUE-96: Should support for logotypes be a SHOULD or a
MAY?
	[Techniques]
	
	
	ISSUE-96: Should support for logotypes be a SHOULD or a MAY? 
	[Techniques]
	
	http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/track/issues/
	
	Raised by: Thomas Roessler
	On product: Techniques
	
	Should support for the display of logotypes be listed as a MAY
or a 
	SHOULD?
	
	a) in primary chrome?
	b) in secondary chrome?