Re: straw poll: Is page info summary a non-Goal?

Maybe yes, maybe no. I'd need the whole scenario to figure it out, since I 
usually ask her a sequence of questions. 







Re: straw poll: Is page info summary a non-Goal?

Serge Egelman 
to:
Mary Ellen Zurko
08/22/2007 10:50 AM


Cc:
Timothy Hahn, public-wsc-wg







Out of curiosity, if a page is spoofing chrome to make a fake Page Info
Summary appear, would your mother be able to explain this over the phone?

I'd be up for leaving it in if someone could suggest a way around this
problem.  Though, I don't think one exists.

serge

Mary Ellen Zurko wrote:
> 
> Which one(s) do you believe Page Info Summary maps to,Tim?
> 
> My favorite potential use case of Page Info Summary is, I think, not in
> wsc-usecases, though is related to the "helping others" type scenarios
> being discussed in ISSUE-83. My mother follows a link in a mail message,
> which takes her somewhere, and she's confused. Is it where she thought
> it would be? She calls me. I ask her questions. If it's a PII Editor Bar
> or TBM world, I can ask her questions just about what she sees or what
> she wants to do. But if it's a "display only" scenario (or her PII has
> changed, or it's not a trusted site to begin with), I (may) need more
> information, and would ask her about Page Info Summary.
> 
>           Mez
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *RE: straw poll: Is page info summary a non-Goal?*
> 
> 
> *Timothy Hahn *                to:             public-wsc-wg 
> 08/21/2007 08:09 AM
> 
> 
> Sent by:               *public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I prefer to leave it in.
> 
> I believe that Page Info Summary is in line with our Goal (2.3) of
> "Consistent presentation of security information".  Further, while one
> reading of our non-goal (3.1) "Presentation of all security information"
> might at first appear to cause Page Info Summary to be considered out of
> scope, I recall that we placed emphasis on the word "all" in this
> non-goal, so as not to be presumptuous that we were all-knowing or would
> ever be so.  Also, in the description of that non-goal (3.1), we state
> that our recommendations should map to use cases.  I believe Page Info
> Summary does map to a number of our use cases.
> 
> Regards,
> Tim Hahn
> IBM Distinguished Engineer
> 
> Internet: hahnt@us.ibm.com
> Internal: Timothy Hahn/Durham/IBM@IBMUS
> phone: 919.224.1565     tie-line: 8/687.1565
> fax: 919.224.2530
> 
> 
> From:          "Dan Schutzer" <dan.schutzer@fstc.org>
> To:            "'Johnathan Nightingale'" <johnath@mozilla.com>, "'Close, 
Tyler J.'"
> <tyler.close@hp.com>
> Cc:            <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
> Date:          08/21/2007 05:57 AM
> Subject:               RE: straw poll: Is page info summary a non-Goal?
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd leave it in
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org
> [_mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org_] On
> Behalf Of Johnathan Nightingale
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 3:29 PM
> To: Close, Tyler J.
> Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: straw poll: Is page info summary a non-Goal?
> 
> 
> I hate to kill a rec that a) improves upon existing UI and b) stands 
> a strong chance of actual implementation, strictly on the basis of 
> time (I think the scope argument is weak), but I appreciate that I 
> wasn't present for the meeting in which this was discussed.
> 
> If we feel that time trumps any perceived gain, and that we should be 
> restricted to threat-response recommendations only, so be it, but the 
> arguments that we're "spending too much time" on it are surprising to 
> me, since it feels like it's not a highly contentious question, and 
> not likely to occupy a lot of our time.
> 
> My own vote would be to leave it in, but I would support someone who 
> said we might want to consider recs in order of perceived urgency, if 
> we're worried about getting certain ones in ahead of time crunches.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> J
> 
> 
> On 15-Aug-07, at 1:58 PM, Close, Tyler J. wrote:
> 
>>
>> Given the tight timeline for our Working Group, I think it is crucial
>> that we prioritize our efforts around achieving our primary goals.
>> Making efficient use of our time is even more important for this WG,
>> given the likelihood that we may need to iterate through the
>> recommendation -> testing cycle.
>>
>> To focus our efforts on our primary goals, I propose that we
>> de-emphasize work on the page info summary
>> <_http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/rec/_
>> rewrite.html#pageinfosummary>. In
>> particular, I propose that this work become a Note, similar to the
>> Threat Trees Note, and not be included in our FPWD Recommendations.
>> We'll have a straw poll in our next telecon on this question.
>>
>> I think the page info summary is a non-Goal, as specified by 
>> section 3.1
>> of our Note
>> <_http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/note/Overview.html#completeness_>.
>> Additionally, our Note states in many places that: "This Working Group
>> is chartered to recommend user interfaces that help users make trust
>> decisions on the Web." The user studies this WG has considered all 
>> show
>> almost non-existent use of the page info summary. In general, users
>> don't go digging for additional security information when engaged in a
>> web browsing activity. Providing more or better options for digging
>> won't help users make trust decisions. Such information may be of 
>> use to
>> expert users, but providing recommendations for the display of this
>> information is not the job of this WG. Considering such recommendation
>> proposals also requires solving difficult problems like display on
>> non-desktop browser user-agents, such as smart phones, widgets, 
>> etc. We
>> simply don't have time to address these issues in a meaningful way, 
>> and
>> doing so takes time away from working on our primary goals.
>>
>> --Tyler
>>
> 
> ---
> Johnathan Nightingale
> Human Shield
> johnath@mozilla.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
/*
Serge Egelman

PhD Candidate
Vice President for External Affairs, Graduate Student Assembly
Carnegie Mellon University

Legislative Concerns Chair
National Association of Graduate-Professional Students
*/