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

RE: ACTION-335 logotypes and ISSUE-96 discussion

From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip <pbaker@verisign.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:15:43 -0800
Message-ID: <2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C316615570E5762@mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
To: "Johnathan Nightingale" <johnath@mozilla.com>
Cc: "W3C WSC Public" <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>

The evidence here is from a statement made by the company at the recent VeriSign analyst day. I am trying to get a concrete reference.

OK we can dispute the accuracy of the statement as it was made by a vendor that could be accused as being self interested. But unlike the statements in the litterature the claim was made under civil and criminal penalties. Making a knowingly false statement to investors is a pretty serious offense these days.

Not beyond dispute but no source of information is. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johnathan Nightingale [mailto:johnath@mozilla.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 10:29 AM
> To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
> Cc: W3C WSC Public
> Subject: Re: ACTION-335 logotypes and ISSUE-96 discussion
> On 14-Nov-07, at 9:51 AM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> > I know that nobody looks at the padlock icon, I didn't need 
> a study to 
> > tell me that. But Overstock certainly would not be seeing an 8.6% 
> > decrease in cart abandonment rates if nobody was noticing the 
> > indicata.
> Hey Phil,
> Is this a fact-in-evidence that I missed?  Maybe at the last 
> face to face?  Real world information like this, even if it's 
> more anecdotal than rigorous, is helpful for framing debate, 
> so if at all possible, I would appreciate any extra 
> information you can offer the list on this topic.
> Cheers,
> J
> ---
> Johnathan Nightingale
> Human Shield
> johnath@mozilla.com
Received on Monday, 19 November 2007 16:20:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:19 UTC