Re: [widgets] Agenda for 19 February 2009 Voice Conference

Hi Mark,
2009/2/19 Priestley, Mark, VF-Group <>:
> Hi Art,
>>c. Action #275 - What is our lifecycle, revocation model?; Mark
> I think this action can be closed - I believe we have agreed that the
> Widget 1.0: Digital Signatures spec will only cover the format,
> generation and processing of a digital signatures. Any link to security
> policy, and therefore lifecycle/revocation models, will now be out of
> scope (at least for the current specs - might need to be discussed again
> in the context of the security spec).
>>d. Action #276 - Submit a short set of requirements re
>>extended permissions and parameters and a proposal to address
>>those requirements (to public-webapps); Mark
> I believe this action can also be closed. The initial discussion was
> around whether the feature element was good enough to represent the
> types of security sensitive operation that a widget could be expected to
> carry out. After further discussion, we think that the feature element
> is good enough - at least in 1.0.

This is great to hear. However, if you have any requirements from 2.0,
please let us know or please add them to the wiki:

Kind regards,
Marcos Caceres

Received on Sunday, 22 February 2009 17:57:02 UTC