- 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