- From: Mary Ellen Zurko <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 08:14:52 -0400
- To: "Robert Yonaitis" <ryonaitis@hisoftware.com>
- Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF718DA6A6.68091C4A-ON852572B5.00424CE3-852572B5.0043475B@LocalDomain>
Hi Robert,
Thanks for providing your review in a timely manner.
I'd like to extract just your comments on 4.2 in this reply.
Since the FPWD of the note, we have generated a glossary, and (web) user
agent is in it:
http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/wiki/Glossary
Since I chose that definition, I like it better than the one you offer. It
is based on wai-webcontent. What I specifically like about it is twofold;
it's a W3C based definition, and it only includes software that a user is
using to access web content.
Adhering to W3C guidelines on accessiblity is important to this wg. It's
called out in the charter. I'm hoping from your comments that you have
some experience with them. On that assumption, I'd like to ask you to:
1) Provide some information to the group on just what that would mean.
Optimally, we would include something in wsc-usecases on what they impact
and how we'll do that.
2) Take a look at the comments from Al Gilman on our public comments list:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-usable-authentication/2007Apr/0000.html
And work with Bill Doyle to extract the issues to log and discuss.
Mez
Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office (t/l 333-6389)
Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation Architect
"Robert Yonaitis" <ryonaitis@hisoftware.com>
04/03/2007 08:51 PM
To
"Mary Ellen Zurko" <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>,
<public-wsc-wg@w3.org>, <yonaif4a@erau.edu>
cc
Subject
Comments RE: The Working draft
Hello All:
Please accept my following comments to the following document:
http://www.w3.org/TR/wsc-usecases/
The following are offered as comments, questions and or suggestions.
4.2 Comments
Our limitations on the definition of user agents could be
counter-productive and the way this is currently worded may allow groups
to say that they don't need to present security information because a
client application does not fall into the category listed by the group in
4.2.
I think that it would make sense for this group and our recommendations to
reference industry accepted common standards and definitions-thus I would
suggest that user agents actually refers to a client application through
which one is accessing the Web.
Web User Agent from Wikipedia.org
?Web user agents range from web browsers to search engine crawlers
("spiders"), as well as mobile phones, screen readers and braille browsers
used by people with disabilities.? (2007). User agent - Wikipedia, the
free encyclopedia. Retrieved April 3, 2007, from Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia Web site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_agent
This is a great definition (IMHO) and is the one I would recommend.
As an additional note, I believe that we should additionally specifically
reference that the Security information being presented also complies with
the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 1.0 A) and of course
WCAG 2.0 (Note: although there might be value in referencing other
standards i.e. US standards, it would not make sense to also include EU,
Dutch, UK, and others, so for harmonization and simplification it is best
to stick with W3C Standards)
[...]
Thank you for your time, and I offer my time to work on this document in
any way that the group sees fit!
Cheers,
Robert B. Yonaitis
Founder and CTO
HiSoftware
http://www.hisoftware.com/
603-496-7414
The information in this transmittal (including attachments, if any) is
privileged and confidential and is intended only for the recipient(s)
listed above. Any review, use, disclosure, distribution or copying of
this transmittal is prohibited except by or on behalf of the intended
recipient. If you have received this transmittal in error, please notify
me immediately by reply email and destroy all copies of the transmittal.
Thank you.
Received on Friday, 6 April 2007 12:15:00 UTC