CAPTCHA: Almost ready!

Colleagues:

This is a CAPTCHA status update to the RQTF Task Force, with a cc to the
COGA Task Fporce.

An updated Editor's Draft is ready for review at the usual web link:

https://w3c.github.io/apa/captcha/


As of this writing there's still a minor glitch hyperlinking new
bibliographic citations to a new COGA related paragraph provided by
Steve Noble. We'll get this sorted quite soon, I'm sure.

There's also an additional COGA related clause in Sec. 2.1.4.1 Visual
Comparison CAPTCHAs also provided by Steve.

The primary changes are:

The Federated Identities and Single Sign-On sections are gone. We simply
could find no evidence that any of them did anything with CAPTCHA or
Turing Tests.

Instead, there's a expanded and rewritten Sec. 3.5 Why not Federated
Turing Tokens? here:
https://w3c.github.io/apa/captcha/#fedtoken

So, we are ready for discussion of this draft in RQTF Wednesday. If RQTF
approves, we'll move in APA to a Call for Consensus on publishing a Second
Public Wide Review draft.

Best,

Janina



Janina Sajka writes:
> Good Monday, All!
> 
> We continue to tighten our argument in CAPTCHA. Since last week's RQTF
> call. Regretably, I believe there's still more to do on this sisyphian
> document. As ever the Editor's Draft is here:
> 
> https://w3c.github.io/apa/captcha/
> 
> ***The Good News***
> 
> *	More is said about cognitive and learning disabilities. See the
> *	first paragraph at
> 	https://w3c.github.io/apa/captcha/#the-accessibility-challenge:
> 
> 	NOTE: There's still time to say more!
> 
> 	*	Sec. 3 has been reorganized, and Secs. 4 and 5
> 	*	incorporated. After all, they're all multi-party
> 	*	approaches. It was illogical to make them separate.
> 
> 	*	The verbs used discussing reCAPTCHA have been changed
> 	*	yet again, this time toward using more present
> 	*	progressive constructs. Two factors drove this: a.) I've
> 	*	found audio reCAPTCHAs still being available; b.) I've
> 	*	found the Google reCAPTCHA FAQ announcing that V. 2 is
> 	*	not going away. That document is now hyperlinked, and
> 	*	the paragraph noting that the content provider decides
> 	*	on fallback under V. 3 edited accordingly.
> 
> *	The potential benefits of Turing Tokens now have their own
> *	separate section here:
> 	https://w3c.github.io/apa/captcha/#why-not-federated-turing-tokens
> 
> *	The list items in our Conclusion section are rewritten somewhat
> *	and now appear as an ordered list.
> 
> ***The Bad News***
> 
> Our discussion of Federated Identity Systems and of Single
> *	Sign-On Systems now appears quite inadequate to me, especially
> *	in the light of what we've discovered and written about Turing
> *	Tokens.
> 
> I'm mulling two potential solutions:
> 
> 1.)	Remove Federated Identity and Single Sign-On. They don't really
> add anything that describes their role in Turing testing.
> 
> 2.)	Combine them into a single section, because the industry is
> itself fairly confused about a bright line between them. Then, blast
> them for ignoring Turing testing entirely as though authenticating
> logins was the only requirement.
> 
> I'm of two minds on the above as I write this. I'm eager to hear
> opinions.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Janina
> 
> -- 
> 
> Janina Sajka
> 
> Linux Foundation Fellow
> Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org
> 
> The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
> Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
> 

-- 

Janina Sajka

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa

Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2019 23:02:46 UTC