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

Re: Rough rec proposal: revisiting past decisions

From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 21:51:31 -0400
To: Mary Ellen Zurko <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>
Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20070505015131.GE3165@raktajino.does-not-exist.org>

Done, see:

  http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/wiki/RecRevisitingPastDecisions

(The template is only half-filled at this point; however, since
ACTION-198 precedes the introduction of the template, I consider it
closed.)

-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>





On 2007-04-23 17:09:25 -0400, Mary Ellen Zurko wrote:
> From: Mary Ellen Zurko <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>
> To: "Thomas Roessler <tlr" <tlr@w3.org>
> Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 17:09:25 -0400
> Subject: Re: Rough rec proposal: revisiting past decisions
> List-Id: <public-wsc-wg.w3.org>
> X-Spam-Level: 
> X-Archived-At:
> 	http://www.w3.org/mid/OF7B65F863.63C4EAE6-ON852572C6.00742536-852572C6.0
> 	0743704@LocalDomain
> X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.5
> 
> Just to be clear, this doesn't yet discharge the action. The intent behind 
> the action is to update the text so that it is a recommendation (or moving 
> in that direction), and, as you note, in the wiki. 
> 
>           Mez
> 
> Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office       (t/l 333-6389)
> Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation Architect
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> 
> Sent by: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org
> 04/23/2007 02:59 PM
> 
> To
> public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> cc
> 
> Subject
> Re: Rough rec proposal: revisiting past decisions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Discharging ACTION-198, again by e-mail and not yet in the Wiki
> since I'm offline.
> 
> - MEZ asked what the relationship was with possible "drill-down"
>   related requirements from the accessibility community.  That's
>   unknown at this point, and no action item was issued to follow up.
>   (Oooops, I wonder if there should be one.)
> 
> - Johnathan indicated that he likes the distinction between "native
>   trust" and personal overrides.
>  
> - Johnathan asked whether the proposal was to have an overall log of
>   decisions; Thomas indicated that that might be valuable, but that
>   the key part was getting a sense of where trust in the current
>   context comes from.
> 
> Source: http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-wsc-minutes.html
> 
> -- 
> Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2007-04-02 16:37:02 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> > From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
> > To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> > Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 16:37:02 +0200
> > Subject: Rough rec proposal: revisiting past decisions
> > X-Spam-Level: 
> > X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.5
> > 
> > Where users are offered with the ability to conditionally proceed
> > with a transaction based on the detection of security issues, they
> > need to be enabled to revisit these decisions when undergoing an
> > interaction that is affected by them.
> > 
> > - activate through some general "help me" secure attention sequence?
> > - shoul "revisit" involve reviewing or also changing past decisions?
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > -- 
> > Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 5 May 2007 01:51:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 5 February 2008 03:52:47 GMT