RE: favicons: updated editor's draft [ACTION-276]

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