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

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

From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 14:26:57 +0200
To: Bruno von Niman <ANEC_W3CRep_Bruno@vonniman.com>
Cc: 'Mary Ellen Zurko' <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>, 'Web Security Context WG' <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20070711122657.GH8439@raktajino.does-not-exist.org>

On 2007-07-09 18:48:33 +0200, Bruno von Niman wrote:

> Well, it’s an important addition (unless you wish to address only
> those fully sighted); I may be able to cover it - the issue
> raised only really requires the addition of a statement like “the
> Web security information should always be communicated in
> multiple, complementing modalities”,

I don't think that's as apple pie as it would seem.  For instance,
when I'm using a web browser in a meeting, I have a strong interest
that it only use *one* of the modalities available, and I get fairly
annoyed when it makes use of others.

Also, covering voice-only interactions sounds like it very quickly
goes to an area in which I don't think we've got the necessary
expertise in this group.

So I'm a bit wary of making too strong statements here.  At the same
time, I agree that we should in no way limit ourselves to just one
modality.

I wonder, though, if this is best dealt with in section 2 or in
section 4.  We could say in section 4 that we consider all
modalities through which a web user agent interacts with users in
scope, and be done?

Bruno, what do you think?

-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2007 12:27:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 5 February 2008 03:52:49 GMT