- From: Mary Ellen Zurko <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:48:34 -0400
- To: Web Security Context WG <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OFDC883E21.CD214275-ON852572C0.004BC906-852572C0.004BEB69@LocalDomain>
I think we're good on this one. Mez Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office (t/l 333-6389) Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation Architect Web Security Context Issue Tracker <dean+cgi@w3.org> Sent by: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org 04/13/2007 07:57 AM Please respond to Web Security Context WG <public-wsc-wg@w3.org> To public-wsc-wg@w3.org cc Subject ISSUE-35: information overload/underload -- no oneSizeFitsAll (public comment) ISSUE-35: information overload/underload -- no oneSizeFitsAll (public comment) http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/Group/track/issues/35 Raised by: Bill Doyle On product: All from public comments information overload/underload -- no oneSizeFitsAll where it says, in 2.2 Relevance of security information The Working Group will analyze common use cases to determine what security information a user requires to proceed safely and recommend security information that should, or should not, be presented in each case. please consider While GUI users rarely perturb the presentation decisions of the web author, Screen reader users commonly do use verbosity settings in their user environment. So the presumption must be that the good practice this Working Group decides on as to "how much to say when" is in fact only competent for user interface modes and conditions similar to the predominant delivery context of web users. It's not universal. Yes, it's good to get more consistency in following this good practice where it fits, but recognize the limits of the goodness of this practice and don't think that this goodness extrapolates across all Web delivery contexts. For that reason, the function/performance model of the security aspect needs to be articulated separately and independently from the good practice binding for presentation of those functions with the desired comprehension and annoyance performance characteristics in the nominal delivery context. In particular, 10.1.8 "Provide explanations ..." shows you realize that the information needs to be there in support of a mixed-initiative, variable-level-of-detail user experience. All the available information should be considered 'conditonal content' of the dialog state as contemplated by UAAG 1.0, Guideline 2. So while the WSC deliverables may well not discuss *how* to present all this information, *some* way to access all this information is a requirement of the UAAG guideline.
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2007 13:48:46 UTC