public-appformats@w3.org from January 2008 by author

Anne van Kesteren

• OPTIONS and redirects (was: Re: Review of 22 Jan editor's draft) (Wednesday, 30 January)
• Re: [access-control] syntax is still suboptimal? (Tuesday, 29 January)
• Re: ISSUE-22 (ac4csr-webarch): The AC4CSR spec and "webarch" [Access Control] (Monday, 28 January)
• Re: Review of 22 Jan editor's draft (Sunday, 27 January)
• Re: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: Method-Check-Expires (was: Re: Feedback on Access Control) (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Method-Check-Expires (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Method-Check-Expires (was: Re: Feedback on Access Control) (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Tuesday, 22 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Tuesday, 22 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Tuesday, 22 January)
• Re: Access Control open/raised issues (Tuesday, 22 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Tuesday, 22 January)
• Re: Access Control: integrated Requirements, Use Cases and FAQ (Monday, 21 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Monday, 21 January)
• Re: Access Control: integrated Requirements, Use Cases and FAQ (Saturday, 19 January)
• Re: Access Control: integrated Requirements, Use Cases and FAQ (Saturday, 19 January)
• Re: <form> POST versus Access Control POST (Friday, 18 January)
• Access Control: integrated Requirements, Use Cases and FAQ (Friday, 18 January)
• Re: linking pre-check to POST and other requests? (Friday, 18 January)
• Access Control open/raised issues (Thursday, 17 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Thursday, 17 January)
• Re: Use case for cross-site DELETE, PUT, ...? (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: Access-Control: Proposed restructuring (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: Access-Control: Proposed restructuring (Wednesday, 16 January)
• FAQ & Use Cases (Wednesday, 16 January)
• <form> POST versus Access Control POST (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Re: More clarity about cookie handling (Monday, 14 January)
• Re: [waf] minutes from 9 January 2008 Voice Conf (fwd) (Saturday, 12 January)
• Re: [waf] minutes from 9 January 2008 Voice Conf (fwd) (Saturday, 12 January)
• Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Tuesday, 8 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: ISSUE-20: Client and Server model [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: ISSUE-20: Client and Server model [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: ISSUE-20: Client and Server model [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 2 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 2 January)

Arthur Barstow

• [access-control] Requirement #5 (Thursday, 31 January)
• Minutes from 30 January 2008 Voice Conference on Access Control (Wednesday, 30 January)
• Fwd: [rest-discuss] W3C Working Group on Cross-Domain requests needs your feedback (Tuesday, 29 January)
• Re: ISSUE-22 (ac4csr-webarch): The AC4CSR spec and "webarch" [Access Control] (Monday, 28 January)
• Agenda for 30 January 2008 Voice Conference (Monday, 28 January)
• [access-control] syntax is still suboptimal? (Monday, 28 January)
• Minutes from 23 January 2008 Voice Conference on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Access Control open/raised issues (Tuesday, 22 January)
• Agenda for 23 January 2008 Voice Conf (Monday, 21 January)
• Re: Access Control: integrated Requirements, Use Cases and FAQ (Monday, 21 January)
• Re: [ac] Security concerns (Friday, 18 January)
• Fwd: Access Control open/raised issues (Thursday, 17 January)
• Re: Access control requirements (Thursday, 17 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Thursday, 17 January)
• [waf] Minutes from 16 January 2008 Voice Conference on Access Control (Wednesday, 16 January)
• [ac] XBL Use Case input (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Fwd: OPTIONS and Method-Check (Monday, 14 January)
• Minutes from WAF WG's 9 January 2008 meeting (Monday, 14 January)
• Re: [waf] Draft of merged Web Apps WG charter available (Saturday, 12 January)
• [access-control] Requirements, UCs and design rationale [Was: Subject: Re: [waf] minutes from 9 January 2008 Voice Conf (fwd) ] (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Are Jon's comments from IBM, the OAA, citizen Jon, ...? [Was: Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/] (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: [waf] New Charter proposal (Monday, 7 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Friday, 4 January)
• Fwd: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 2 January)

Bertrand Le Roy

• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Monday, 7 January)
• RE: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Friday, 4 January)
• RE: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Friday, 4 January)

Bjoern Hoehrmann

• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Saturday, 5 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Saturday, 5 January)
• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Saturday, 5 January)

Brad Porter

• RE: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Re: [waf] minutes from 9 January 2008 Voice Conf (fwd) (Saturday, 12 January)
• Re: Examining the 'no server modification' requirement (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: Examining the 'no server modification' requirement (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: Examining the 'no server modification' requirement (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: Are Jon's comments from IBM, the OAA, citizen Jon, ...? [Was: Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/] (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: Are Jon's comments from IBM, the OAA, citizen Jon, ...? [Was: Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/] (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: ISSUE-20: Client and Server model [Access Control] (Tuesday, 8 January)

Close, Tyler J.

• RE: Proposal for a way to avoid a round-trip on every POST when dealing with large numbers of URIs (Thursday, 31 January)
• RE: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• RE: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• RE: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• RE: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• RE: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• RE: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Tuesday, 8 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Monday, 7 January)
• RE: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• RE: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 2 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 2 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 2 January)

Dave Orchard

• RE: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Monday, 28 January)

David Orchard

• RE: ISSUE-22 (ac4csr-webarch): The AC4CSR spec and "webarch" [Access Control] (Monday, 28 January)
• RE: [waf] Draft of merged Web Apps WG charter available (Thursday, 24 January)
• RE: [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Wednesday, 23 January)
• RE: Access Control open/raised issues (Tuesday, 22 January)
• RE: Access Control: integrated Requirements, Use Cases and FAQ (Monday, 21 January)
• RE: Access Control: integrated Requirements, Use Cases and FAQ (Saturday, 19 January)
• RE: Access-Control: Proposed restructuring (Wednesday, 16 January)
• RE: Access-Control: Proposed restructuring (Wednesday, 16 January)
• RE: specification style; last call (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Access-Control: Proposed restructuring (Wednesday, 16 January)
• [waf] Access Control Issue 19: Requirements document updated dated 20080114 (Tuesday, 15 January)
• RE: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• RE: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• RE: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Monday, 14 January)
• RE: [waf] Draft of merged Web Apps WG charter available (Saturday, 12 January)
• RE: [waf] minutes from 9 January 2008 Voice Conf (fwd) (Friday, 11 January)
• Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Wednesday, 9 January)
• ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Wednesday, 9 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Monday, 7 January)
• RE: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Friday, 4 January)
• RE: ISSUE-20: Client and Server model [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• RE: ISSUE-20: Client and Server model [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)

Doug Schepers

• Re: [waf] New Charter proposal (Monday, 7 January)
• Re: [waf] New Charter proposal (Monday, 7 January)

Douglas Crockford

• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 2 January)

Emmanouil Batsis (Manos)

• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Saturday, 5 January)

Grosso, Paul

• RE: Request for review on Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 16 January)

Henri Sivonen

• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Monday, 7 January)
• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Monday, 7 January)
• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Saturday, 5 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Saturday, 5 January)

Ian Hickson

• Re: Proposal for a way to avoid a round-trip on every POST when dealing with large numbers of URIs (Thursday, 31 January)
• Proposal for a way to avoid a round-trip on every POST when dealing with large numbers of URIs (Wednesday, 30 January)
• Re: [access-control] syntax is still suboptimal? (Tuesday, 29 January)
• RE: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• RE: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: Method-Check-Expires (was: Re: Feedback on Access Control) (Thursday, 24 January)
• RE: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Tuesday, 22 January)
• Re: <form> POST versus Access Control POST (Thursday, 17 January)
• Re: linking pre-check to POST and other requests? (Wednesday, 16 January)
• RE: Access-Control: Proposed restructuring (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: Access-Control: Proposed restructuring (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: OPTIONS and Method-Check (Sunday, 13 January)
• Re: [waf] minutes from 9 January 2008 Voice Conf (fwd) (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: Examining the 'no server modification' requirement (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: Examining the 'no server modification' requirement (Friday, 11 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 2 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Tuesday, 1 January)

James Graham

• Re: Access-Control: Proposed restructuring (Wednesday, 16 January)

John Panzer

• Re: Proposal for a way to avoid a round-trip on every POST when dealing with large numbers of URIs (Thursday, 31 January)

Jon Ferraiolo

• Re: ACTION-154: policy decision / enforcement points (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Saturday, 19 January)
• Re: Access Control: integrated Requirements, Use Cases and FAQ (Friday, 18 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Wednesday, 16 January)
• RE: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• RE: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Re: [waf] minutes from 9 January 2008 Voice Conf (fwd) (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: [waf] minutes from 9 January 2008 Voice Conf (fwd) (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: Are Jon's comments from IBM, the OAA, citizen Jon, ...? [Was: Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/] (Thursday, 10 January)
• Re: Are Jon's comments from IBM, the OAA, citizen Jon, ...? [Was: Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/] (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: Are Jon's comments from IBM, the OAA, citizen Jon, ...? [Was: Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/] (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Tuesday, 8 January)
• Re: [waf] New Charter proposal (Monday, 7 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Sunday, 6 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Saturday, 5 January)
• RE: ISSUE-20: Client and Server model [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Thursday, 3 January)
• RE: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: [widgets] Open Ajax Alliance (Wednesday, 2 January)

Jonas Sicking

• ACTION-165: New wording for requirement 12 (Wednesday, 30 January)
• ACTION-162: Suggested new wording for requirement 4 (Wednesday, 30 January)
• Re: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: time change for WAF WG telcons [was: Minutes from 23 January 2008 Voice Conference on Access Control] (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: [access-control] Editorial comments on Requirements Appendix v1.137 (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Access Control: integrated Requirements, Use Cases and FAQ (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Saturday, 19 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Friday, 18 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Friday, 18 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Friday, 18 January)
• Re: linking pre-check to POST and other requests? (Friday, 18 January)
• Re: Access Control open/raised issues (Thursday, 17 January)
• Re: Access control requirements (Thursday, 17 January)
• [ac] Security concerns (Thursday, 17 January)
• Re: <form> POST versus Access Control POST (Thursday, 17 January)
• Access control requirements (Thursday, 17 January)
• Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Tuesday, 8 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Sunday, 6 January)
• Re: GET vs HEAD vs OPTIONS (Sunday, 6 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Saturday, 5 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)

José Manuel Cantera Fonseca

• Re: [widgets] Open Ajax Alliance (Wednesday, 2 January)

L. David Baron

• Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Wednesday, 9 January)

Marcos Caceres

• Re: time change for WAF WG telcons [was: Minutes from 23 January 2008 Voice Conference on Access Control] (Thursday, 24 January)

Mark Baker

• Re: <form> POST versus Access Control POST (Thursday, 17 January)

Mark Nottingham

• Re: [access-control] syntax is still suboptimal? (Tuesday, 29 January)
• Re: [access-control] syntax is still suboptimal? (Tuesday, 29 January)
• Re: [access-control] syntax is still suboptimal? (Tuesday, 29 January)
• Re: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: Method-Check-Expires (was: Re: Feedback on Access Control) (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Method-Check-Expires (was: Re: Feedback on Access Control) (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Thursday, 24 January)
• Re: P3P - Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Wednesday, 23 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Tuesday, 22 January)
• Feedback on Access Control (Tuesday, 22 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Re: Examining the 'no server modification' requirement (Tuesday, 15 January)
• Re: [waf] minutes from 9 January 2008 Voice Conf (fwd) (Saturday, 12 January)
• Re: Examining the 'no server modification' requirement (Friday, 11 January)
• Re: (Thursday, 10 January)
• Examining the 'no server modification' requirement (Thursday, 10 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Wednesday, 9 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Tuesday, 8 January)
• Re: [waf] New Charter proposal (Monday, 7 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Thursday, 3 January)

Michael(tm) Smith

• time change for WAF WG telcons [was: Minutes from 23 January 2008 Voice Conference on Access Control] (Thursday, 24 January)

Ric Johnson

• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Wednesday, 2 January)

Subbu Allamaraju

• Re: Proposal for a way to avoid a round-trip on every POST when dealing with large numbers of URIs (Thursday, 31 January)

Thomas Roessler

• Re: Proposal for a way to avoid a round-trip on every POST when dealing with large numbers of URIs (Thursday, 31 January)
• redirect model for non-GET requests (Re: OPTIONS and redirects (was: Re: Review of 22 Jan editor's draft)) (Thursday, 31 January)
• Re: Minutes from 30 January 2008 Voice Conference on Access Control (Thursday, 31 January)
• Re: Proposal for a way to avoid a round-trip on every POST when dealing with large numbers of URIs (Thursday, 31 January)
• On Requirement 9 and "deny" (Wednesday, 30 January)
• ACTION-158: Input for requirement 1.1 (Wednesday, 30 January)
• Requirement 10 (Re: Requirement 11) (Wednesday, 30 January)
• Requirement 11 (Wednesday, 30 January)
• Req 1.2 (Wednesday, 30 January)
• Re: Review of 22 Jan editor's draft (Tuesday, 29 January)
• Re: ACTION-154: policy decision / enforcement points (Tuesday, 29 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• ACTION-154: policy decision / enforcement points (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: Feedback on Access Control (Friday, 25 January)
• Re: time change for WAF WG telcons [was: Minutes from 23 January 2008 Voice Conference on Access Control] (Thursday, 24 January)
• Review of 22 Jan editor's draft (Wednesday, 23 January)
• [fwd] common dns misconfiguration can lead to "same site" scripting (from: taviso@sdf.lonestar.org) (Friday, 18 January)
• Re: <form> POST versus Access Control POST (Friday, 18 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Thursday, 17 January)
• Re: linking pre-check to POST and other requests? (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: Use case for cross-site DELETE, PUT, ...? (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: Use case for cross-site DELETE, PUT, ...? (Wednesday, 16 January)
• linking pre-check to POST and other requests? (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Use case for cross-site DELETE, PUT, ...? (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: FAQ & Use Cases (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: Access-Control: Proposed restructuring (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: ISSUE 19: Requirements and Usage Scenarios document (Wednesday, 16 January)
• specification style; last call (Wednesday, 16 January)
• Re: More clarity about cookie handling (Monday, 14 January)
• Re: More clarity about cookie handling (Sunday, 13 January)
• Re: Examining the 'no server modification' requirement (Saturday, 12 January)
• Comments on requirements document (Saturday, 12 January)
• Re: ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Tuesday, 8 January)
• Re: GET / HEAD / OPTIONS (Tuesday, 8 January)
• Re: Comments on: Access Control for Cross-site Requests (Tuesday, 8 January)

Web Application Formats Working Group Issue Tracker

• ISSUE-22 (ac4csr-webarch): The AC4CSR spec and "webarch" [Access Control] (Monday, 28 January)
• ISSUE-21: What is the Security Model for the access-control spec? [Access Control] (Tuesday, 15 January)
• ISSUE-20: Client and Server model [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• ISSUE-19: What are the Requirements, Design Principles and Use Cases? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)
• ISSUE-18: Is JSONRequest an acceptable alternative to the current model? [Access Control] (Friday, 4 January)

Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)

• RE: Review of http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ (Wednesday, 9 January)

Last message date: Thursday, 31 January 2008 19:49:21 UTC