W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wsc-wg@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Comments RE: The Working draft - section 42.

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: 

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: 


And work with Bill Doyle to extract the issues to log and discuss. 


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

"Mary Ellen Zurko" <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>, 
<public-wsc-wg@w3.org>, <yonaif4a@erau.edu>

Comments RE: The Working draft

Hello All:
Please accept my following comments to the following document:
The following are offered as comments, questions and or suggestions.
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 
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!
Robert B. Yonaitis
Founder and CTO

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:36:44 UTC