- From: Dan Schutzer <dan.schutzer@fstc.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 05:56:21 -0400
- To: "'Johnathan Nightingale'" <johnath@mozilla.com>, "'Close, Tyler J.'" <tyler.close@hp.com>
- Cc: <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
I'd leave it in -----Original Message----- From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Johnathan Nightingale Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 3:29 PM To: Close, Tyler J. Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org Subject: Re: straw poll: Is page info summary a non-Goal? I hate to kill a rec that a) improves upon existing UI and b) stands a strong chance of actual implementation, strictly on the basis of time (I think the scope argument is weak), but I appreciate that I wasn't present for the meeting in which this was discussed. If we feel that time trumps any perceived gain, and that we should be restricted to threat-response recommendations only, so be it, but the arguments that we're "spending too much time" on it are surprising to me, since it feels like it's not a highly contentious question, and not likely to occupy a lot of our time. My own vote would be to leave it in, but I would support someone who said we might want to consider recs in order of perceived urgency, if we're worried about getting certain ones in ahead of time crunches. Cheers, J On 15-Aug-07, at 1:58 PM, Close, Tyler J. wrote: > > Given the tight timeline for our Working Group, I think it is crucial > that we prioritize our efforts around achieving our primary goals. > Making efficient use of our time is even more important for this WG, > given the likelihood that we may need to iterate through the > recommendation -> testing cycle. > > To focus our efforts on our primary goals, I propose that we > de-emphasize work on the page info summary > <http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/rec/ > rewrite.html#pageinfosummary>. In > particular, I propose that this work become a Note, similar to the > Threat Trees Note, and not be included in our FPWD Recommendations. > We'll have a straw poll in our next telecon on this question. > > I think the page info summary is a non-Goal, as specified by > section 3.1 > of our Note > <http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/note/Overview.html#completeness>. > Additionally, our Note states in many places that: "This Working Group > is chartered to recommend user interfaces that help users make trust > decisions on the Web." The user studies this WG has considered all > show > almost non-existent use of the page info summary. In general, users > don't go digging for additional security information when engaged in a > web browsing activity. Providing more or better options for digging > won't help users make trust decisions. Such information may be of > use to > expert users, but providing recommendations for the display of this > information is not the job of this WG. Considering such recommendation > proposals also requires solving difficult problems like display on > non-desktop browser user-agents, such as smart phones, widgets, > etc. We > simply don't have time to address these issues in a meaningful way, > and > doing so takes time away from working on our primary goals. > > --Tyler > --- Johnathan Nightingale Human Shield johnath@mozilla.com
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2007 09:56:50 UTC