- From: Klotz, Leigh <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:27:46 -0800
- To: "John Boyer" <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <E254B0A7E0268949ABFE5EA97B7D0CF403E461B7@USA7061MS01.na.xerox.net>
This draft looks more implementable in XForms but I'd like to have feedback from implementors in the WG before responding. Here are some issues. 1. Although it mentions other specifications, it still does not offer any concrete suggestions or even informative references to XForms. 2. There is no provision for user agent configuration on a per-user basis to override (+/-) the header- or PI-specified permissions. Mozilla XForms for example allows the user to specify Load and Save permissions for resources, and this allows the end user to specially enable "mashup" type application. See next point. 3. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it looks to me like services need to take special care to offer their resources, and if they do not, they are by default closed, with no recourse, even that of asking the user. Similarly, there is no indication that a UA can be configured to use or not to use these rules. 4. Why not use HEAD instead of GET on the resource? Is it because of the PI? 5. The PI and headers are said to be allowed together, but it doesn't say how they combine (PI wins? They add?) 6. In section 4.3, are multiple PIs allowed? If not, how can one combine allow and deny semantics? 7. Allow and Deny semantics can be combined quite clearly, along with resource identification, as is done in INETD (xinetd) TCPWrappers, which allow combinations of Allow and Deny directives along with the names of local resources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinetd This model is quite widely deployed, and allows servers to grant access to their resources based on resource (in this case, process name and port), and client IP address. I would suggest that the WG look at this mechanism and make sure that the lessons learned here are applied. Leigh. ________________________________ From: John Boyer [mailto:boyerj@ca.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 10:12 AM To: Klotz, Leigh Cc: Forms WG (new) Subject: Re: [access-control] Forms WG comments on Access Control WD Hi Leigh, Would you please submit something to the group today to help guide the discussion of this issue, which can be on tomorrow's agenda. Of course someone else can do minutes while you are talking... Thanks, John M. Boyer, Ph.D. Senior Technical Staff Member Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher Chair, W3C Forms Working Group Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Victoria Software Lab E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer <http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer> Blog RSS feed: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/rss/JohnBoyer?flavor=rssdw <http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/rss/JohnBoyer?flavor=rssdw> "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com> Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org 12/11/2007 08:43 AM To "Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>, public-appformats@w3.org cc "Forms WG" <public-forms@w3.org> Subject Re: [access-control] Forms WG comments on Access Control WD Hi, On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 22:59:59 +0200, Klotz, Leigh <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com> wrote: > The Forms WG is interested in providing comments on the "Enabling Read > Access for Web Resources" working draft [1]. We recently published a new Working Draft on TR/ and the latest editor's is a little bit further ahead (editorial changes): http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/ <http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071126/> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/access-control/ <http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/access-control/> If you're going to provide feedback it would be good if you base it on those drafts. > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071001/ <http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-access-control-20071001/> Kind regards, -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/ <http://annevankesteren.nl/> > <http://www.opera.com/ <http://www.opera.com/> >
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 18:35:10 UTC