RE: FW: ISSUE-83: Scenario updates (for certain abilities andfunctional limitations)

Use case 1 is a draft replacement for the child protection use case

Use case 2 is the disability use case written to fit the standard use case
template

Use case 3 is the last use case I submitted with a minor change


Use Case 1
Last night, unknown to Jane, Jane's company installed a filter on her PC
that blocks sites her company feels are inappropriate for Jane to be
accessing from work. This includes FaceBook. Jane turns on her PC and sets
her browser to FaceBook where she maintains an on-line Profile. Jane gets
back a page that says this site was not accessible. Jane is not sure what
this means was there a technical difficulty with the site?

Destination site 
routine interaction, known organization

Navigation 
types in url

Intended interaction 
access website

Actual interaction 
Site not accessible notice

Note
------------------------------------------------------------------
Use Case 2
Mary attempts to access a site that has been identified by the browser as a
phishing site. Mary is visually impaired how will the browser warn Mary
about the site? What if Mary had other disabilities; e.g. poor hearing,
dexterity?

Destination site 
no prior interaction, unknown organization

Navigation 
clicks on a link

Intended interaction 
access website

Actual interaction 
Warning

Note
 
------------------------------------------- 
 

Use Case 3
Frank regularly reads his email in the morning. This morning he receives an
email that claims it is from his bank asking him to verify a recent
transaction by clicking on the link embedded in the email. The link does not
display the usual URL that he types to get to his bank's website, but it
does have his bank's name in it. He clicks on the link and is directed to a
phishing site. The phishing site has been shut down as a known fraudulent
site, so when Frank clicks on the link he receives the generic Error 404:
File Not Found page. Frank is not sure what has occurred.

Destination site 
prior interaction, known organization

Navigation 
clicks on a link

Intended interaction 
access website

Actual interaction 
Was a phishing site that has been shut down

Note
Frank is likely to fall for a similar phishing email. Is there some way to
educate Frank this time by letting him know that he had been trying to
access a phishing site, so that he is less likely to fail for the phishing
email again? 


-----Original Message-----
From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Thomas Roessler
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 6:01 AM
To: Dan Schutzer
Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: FW: ISSUE-83: Scenario updates (for certain abilities
andfunctional limitations)


On 2007-08-30 05:31:09 -0400, Dan Schutzer wrote:

> I think Use Case 2 is fine

My point was that I disagree with this, since it suggests we are
going to address generic child protection technologies -- which is
clearly far out of our scope.  Can you suggest a use case that
exposes the different capabilities, yet avoids the misunderstanding
that we're dealing with child protection in general?

-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>






> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of Thomas Roessler
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 4:32 PM
> To: Dan Schutzer
> Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: FW: ISSUE-83: Scenario updates (for certain abilities
> andfunctional limitations)
> 
> 
> On 2007-08-20 06:20:15 -0400, Dan Schutzer wrote:
> 
> > Another shot at two use cases. I will have another one to add by
> > end of day
> 
> Has anything happened to that from your side?
> 
> Also, I had written:
> 
> > Also, I still think we should stay away from child protection use
> > cases, meaning I'd strike the second of these use cases.  If we are
> > specifically after usability for children (where I think this
> > started from), then I think that should be said explicitly.
> 
> ... with regad to this use case:
> 
> >> Use Case 2: Mary?s eight year old daughter has asked to use the
> >> home PC to
> 
> >> access the Internet. Mary gives her daughter access to her
> >> computer. Mary trusts her daughter, but is concerned that she
> >> might inadvertently be directed to sites with inappropriate
> >> adult content and not be mature enough to handle it. How can
> >> the browser warn Mary?s daughter when she tries to access a web
> >> site with inappropriate content?
> 
> Any comments on this?
> 
> -- 
> Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 31 August 2007 11:38:36 UTC