- From: <michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:38:48 -0500
- To: <tlr@w3.org>, <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
I would have preferred a strict outright ban on favicons (and similar content-controlled trust signals) in all chrome areas, but I'm generally satisfied this rewrite captures the original intent & spirit of my proposal. My only residual concern is that it calls out explicitly the location bar as a chrome area where agents must not display these icons, while leaving applicability to other areas of UI chrome ambiguous. Do we consider favicons in bookmark lists or tab titles a "secondary user interface intended to enable user's trust decisions"? I know I do. Mike McCormick -----Original Message----- From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Roessler Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 9:16 AM To: WSC WG Subject: favicons: updated editor's draft [ACTION-276] Per ACTION-276 from last week's call, I've tried a rewrite of some of the favicons material in the light of the discussion at our last call; see: http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/rec/rewrite.html#site-identifying @@Web Security Context@@ Editor's Draft $Date: 2007/08/08 14:11:27 $ Relevant changes include: - a generalization to, essentially, "do not mix content and security indicators" (that's now the heading of the section). - a re-phrasing of the top-level requirement. - a conformance note that throws user testing into the mix, on the hypothesis that the current language requires something like that. I expect that we'll want to discuss this more generically at some point; this is also listed as an open question in section 2.1, so we don't lose it; see: http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/rec/rewrite.html#issueConformanceUsabi lity - Tim Hahn's definition of the location bar widget, from the Glossary, with small changes to make it fit the style of other definitions in the document; this is in a new section 3.2.1, "Common User Interface Elements" -- I'm guessing we'll have more of these. - harmonization of the references in the various favicon techniques. - downgrading of the "no favicons at all" technique from SUFFICIENT, since the requirement is now phrased more generally, and there are more ways to break it. Comments are, as always, welcome. Regards, -- Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 10 August 2007 19:39:21 UTC