- From: Johnathan Nightingale <johnath@mozilla.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 15:52:06 -0700
- To: Timothy Hahn <hahnt@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Web Security Context WG <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <962F38AA-7685-4AFA-B2BF-81FC86F76100@mozilla.com>
Echoing comments I've made on the calls, I am also a fan of this section. Not only does it document the context in which recommendations were generated (Mez's point) but it is also a reasonably useful list to which to refer; at least for me. I'm fine with changing the language though, so that we don't claim to be something we're not. Cheers, J --- Johnathan Nightingale Human Shield johnath@mozilla.com On 9-Apr-07, at 8:22 AM, Timothy Hahn wrote: > > +1 on keeping the section. > > I think we could come up with a better adjective than > "exhaustive". Perhaps "well known" or "known" would be > sufficiently precise for now. > > Regards, > Tim Hahn > IBM Distinguished Engineer > > Internet: hahnt@us.ibm.com > Internal: Timothy Hahn/Durham/IBM@IBMUS > phone: 919.224.1565 tie-line: 8/687.1565 > fax: 919.224.2530 > > > > "Mary Ellen Zurko" <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com> > Sent by: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org > 04/09/07 10:26 AM > > To > Web Security Context WG <public-wsc-wg@w3.org> > cc > Subject > Re: ISSUE-28: \"available security information\" > > > > > > > > However, in its current state, I'm inclined to consider this > section neither > > "exhaustive" (as the text claims it is), nor particularly useful. > > I disagree on the utility. > > It's good to see an overview of the available security information > that we've identified. Readers don't need to ask "have you thought > about using x?", since they can just check the list. And it has > useful references as well. > > I would argue against removing it, even in its current form. > > Mez >
Received on Monday, 9 April 2007 22:52:15 UTC