Re: Documenting status quo

http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/wiki/DocumentStatusQuo

Looks good. A little jarring for me when I'm reading your text, then my 
voice cuts in with "I". That'll need to be cleaned up.

"can"s and "should"s don't belong as part of Documenting the status quo 
(if they're talking about future possibilities). They need to get pulled 
out into recommendations to be discussed. Specifically:
Authentication Robustness Capabilities of the application can be limited 
based on authentication mechanism (e.g. Id/Pw = basic services Buy sell 
stock < $10,000, Smart cart = buy sell stocks < $1M 
Site Introductions Users should have a way marking the "trust" of a 
particular sight. If the user was given the site URL from a trusted source 
and that the user has a high degree of confidence in the URL. 

And we're still lacking a pass for the "corresponding user interpretations 
reporting in user studies". That will need to be folded in. 

          Mez

Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office       (t/l 333-6389)
Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation Architect




"Doyle, Bill" <wdoyle@mitre.org> 
03/25/2007 08:22 PM

To
"Mary Ellen Zurko" <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>, 
<public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
cc

Subject
Documenting status quo






Put some effort into the "Documenting Status Quo" 
 
Tried to put some structure to capture the items that we have/are talking 
about, including analysis of items. I am sure I have still missed some 
items. 
 
Comments would be great.
 
Thx
Bill D.
From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] 
On Behalf Of Mary Ellen Zurko
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 12:16 PM
To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: ISSUE-11: \"Problems with the status quo\"


I believe this is taken care of in the current draft of wsc-usecases. I am 
closing. 

          Mez

Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office       (t/l 333-6389)
Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation Architect