W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wsc-wg@w3.org > July 2007

RE: ISSUE-80: Non-visual (multiomodal) presentation of security information

From: Mary Ellen Zurko <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 08:12:16 -0400
To: "Doyle, Bill" <wdoyle@mitre.org>
Cc: "Web Security Context WG" <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFAC112B30.F4E8D4B7-ON85257310.0042E2B1-85257310.00430ACD@LocalDomain>
Thanks Bill, Touching based with a voice XML expert will be really useful, 
not necessarily around wsc-usecases, but when we get out the FPWD of the 
rec track document. So they can give concrete feedback on what's "easy" 
and what's "hard" in voice. Which I'm hoping will be soon. 

          Mez





"Doyle, Bill" <wdoyle@mitre.org> 
07/05/2007 08:24 PM

To
"Mary Ellen Zurko" <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>, "Web Security 
Context WG" <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
cc

Subject
RE: ISSUE-80: Non-visual (multiomodal) presentation of security 
information






I may be able to touch base with an voice XML expert to see what they have 
figured out. He has worked through one issue I note below - the need to 
authenticate using non-verbal mechanisms. Should not be required to give 
passwords or privacy info out loud.
 
The rest of the items I run through are the same as visual, the handshake 
needs to provide voice or tone clues if the site is using security and 
need to be able to verify that it is the intended end-point. This impacts 
everyone as systems are increasingly accessed through speech UI's
 
I ran into trouble accessing a system where it required me to voice my 
credentials. I was not in a private area, only option was to hang up.
 
Bill
 
From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] 
On Behalf Of Mary Ellen Zurko
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 12:08 PM
To: Web Security Context WG
Subject: Re: ISSUE-80: Non-visual (multiomodal) presentation of security 
information


We have accessibility explicitly called out as an area we'll get review 
from (section 10). I'm concerned about making any specific commitments 
when we don't have the right experts to follow through. We lost our one 
voice browser expert (that I knew about) a while back. So while we're 
committed to incorporating review feedback on that issue (at least in 
terms of accessiblity), and it's clearly in scope, I'm not sure what 
addtional goal we should add that we have the ability to follow through 
on. What, if anything, would you (or anyone in the WG) propose? 



Web Security Context Issue Tracker <dean+cgi@w3.org> 
Sent by: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org 
07/02/2007 07:38 A 

Please respond to
Web Security Context WG <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>



To
public-wsc-wg@w3.org 
cc

Subject
ISSUE-80: Non-visual (multiomodal) presentation of security information










ISSUE-80: Non-visual (multiomodal) presentation of security information

http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/Group/track/issues/80

Raised by: Bruno von Niman
On product: Note: use cases etc.

The Web is increasingly accessed through speech UIs, of considerable 
importance 
to blind consumers. Chapter 2 should therefore include non-visual 
presentation 
of the security information.
Received on Friday, 6 July 2007 12:12:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 5 February 2008 03:52:48 GMT