RE: ISSUE-10: The Web, The Universe, and Everything

I've updated our Note to reflect Thomas' ISSUE-10 notes, use-case rework
and some of the publication rules verification. Thomas, please check
that our XSLT stylesheet is current, as some of the errors seem like
things it should be handling.

As always, the Note is at:

http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/note/

I'll be busy, and out of contact, with work stuff until the 26th. I'll
get to further edits after that. I also won't be on the telecon for the
20th. 

Tyler

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Roessler [mailto:tlr@w3.org] 
> Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 7:42 AM
> To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org; Close, Tyler J.
> Subject: ISSUE-10: The Web, The Universe, and Everything
> 
> Sorry for the lateness; I fear that this e-mail will take 
> another while to make it from my laptop to the list.
> 
> Rename 4.1 to "Web Interactions" and rewrite as follows:
> 
>   User interactions on the Web [WEBARCH], using the HTTP and HTTPS
>   protocols, are at the core of the Working Group's scope.  Where
>   Web interactions involve other application-level protocols
>   (including, e.g., SOAP or FTP), the Working Group considers these
>   in its scope and will aim that its recommendations be applicable;
>   however, the Working Group does not consider recommendations that
>   are specific to such protocols as a Goal.
> 
> 4.2, "user agents"
> 
>   Strike the sentence "The Web browser commonly found on desktop
>   computers...", and replace by this:  "Any user agent that is used
>   in a Web interaction is in scope; the range of such agents
>   includes widely deployed web browsers, rich clients, and the web
>   browsers found on mobile phones and other constrained devices."
>   
>   (I'd like to put the emphasis on the universality and the
>   interactions, and only then enumerate examples.)
>   
> Add an introductory paragraph to "out of scope":
> 
>   This section to enumerate a number of possible work items that the
>   Working Group will not consider.
>   
> Change 5.1 to "Protocols":
> 
>   The Working Group considers recommendations for lower level
>   protocols (such as SS7, ISDN, or NANP) out of scope.  
> 
> (Can we spell out what NANP is?  Being offline, I can't find 
> what it even is.)
> 
> Change 5.2 to "non-Web interactions":
> 
>   The Working Group considers recommendations specific to
>   interactions that do not involve the Web (e.g., rich text display
>   in an e-mail user agent) out of its scope.  However, where such
>   interactions use Web Technologies, recommendations may turn out to
>   be applicable.
> 
> Rationale: When a rich mail client displays an HTML message 
> and effectively creates a web browser user experience, what 
> we do might very well be applicable, and it might make sense 
> to claim that the behavior of such an agent conforms to our 
> recommendations.
> 
> Change 5.3 to "Security context information for consumption 
> by automated agents":
> 
>   The Working Group will only consider Web interactions that include
>   a human user.  Situations in which all security relevant
>   information is consumed and acted upon my automated agents are out
>   of scope.
> 
> Add the following to section 3 (non-goals); before section 
> 3.1. Note that this is just my understanding of what is meant 
> by "non-goals"; I'd ask (in particular) Hal to review this.
> 
>   This section outlines a range of work items which the group will
>   not focus on, but which may be covered as beneficial side effects
>   of the group's work.  Work items listed here won't be a priority,
>   and the group won't expend collective resources on tackling them.
>   
> I'm somewhat unhappy with the title of 3.1, but can't think 
> of a much better one right now.  Maybe add an editor's note 
> that this will be renamed later.  (Note that the text is fine.)
> 
> Add 3.2, "Non-HTTP Web interactions"
> 
>   Recommendations that this group makes may or may not be relevant
>   to Web related interactions that use protocols other than HTTP or
>   HTTPS.  While the group will aim for its recommendations to be
>   generically useful -- where appropriate --, it considers
>   recommendations specific to other protocols as a Non-Goal.
> 
> Regards,
> --
> Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
>

Received on Saturday, 17 February 2007 00:36:52 UTC