- From: Dan Schutzer <dan.schutzer@fstc.org>
- Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 06:50:37 -0400
- To: <michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com>, <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
I agree with Mike's comments -----Original Message----- From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 4:02 PM To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org Subject: RE: ISSUE-97: Should logotypes be tied to EV certificates? [Techniques] Logotypes should be tied to X.509 certificates that have been strongly vetted per EV rules or similar. WSC cannot mandate EV specifically since it's not a standard. Plus we should leave the door open to other communities to create "EV-like" X.509 schemes. My industry is currently considering just that. On a related note, the CAB Forum should turn over their EV spec to an industry standards body. ANSI X9F has invited them to submit it as a replacement for X9.79 (on which WebTrust is based) but their response was non-committal. Mike McCormick -----Original Message----- From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Web Security Context Working Group Issue Tracker Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 11:53 AM To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org Subject: ISSUE-97: Should logotypes be tied to EV certificates? [Techniques] ISSUE-97: Should logotypes be tied to EV certificates? [Techniques] http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/track/issues/ Raised by: Thomas Roessler On product: Techniques Should the display of logotypes associated with certificates be tied to the use of Extended Validation certificates?
Received on Sunday, 12 August 2007 10:51:00 UTC