Re: wsc-usecases comments Re: Comments on draft documents posted to the WSC wiki

Great. Yeah, I didn't make it clear enough in either of the mail messages 
I sent, but it's embedded in there. 

Consensus on the subset of editorial comments from Tim H on wsc-usecases 
as identified below remains in force. 

          Mez





From:
"Ian Fette" <ifette@google.com>
To:
"Mary Ellen Zurko" <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>
Cc:
ttyler.close@hp.com, public-wsc-wg@w3.org
Date:
01/02/2008 12:26 PM
Subject:
Re: usecases comments Re: Comments on draft documents posted to the WSC 
wiki



Oops... it appears I'm still getting back into the swing of things after 
vacation. Tim's original email was about his comments, and he had posted 
comments about wsc-xit as well. I didn't see that mez was only referring 
to his comments on the usecases document. 

-Ian

On Jan 2, 2008 9:12 AM, Ian Fette <ifette@google.com> wrote:
Whoa... not ready for "consensus" changes on all of these yet. I haven't 
had a chance yet to go through everyone's comments. I know year-end was 
crazy for me, and I imagine that others had similar experiences, so I 
don't know that it's really safe to assume that silence at the end of the 
year (when people are leaving for holidays etc) implies consensus. 

For instance, there was a change saying an attested certificate has been 
validated rather than can be validated - that's not a minor re-wording, 
that is a semantic change, and since we were talking about changes of 
security levels on validation errors, etc, I need a minute to parse 
whether this change is actually affecting anything else. 

I would ask for a bit more time before we adopt all of these changes. I 
agree that most are editorial, but I'm not sure I agree on *all* of them 
being so.

-Ian


On Jan 2, 2008 8:50 AM, Mary Ellen Zurko < 
Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com> wrote:

Since this is about consensus on (purely) editorial changes to 
wsc-usecases, I am declaring that two weeks of silence, that included the 
holidays, is sufficient for these changes. Tyler, as editor, please make 
them. I'll create an action item for tracking purposes because, in the 
face of last call being over and no issues against wsc-usecases, we can 
finalize this document. I will put it on a meeting agenda for us to 
resolve to publish the note (or rather, technical report), when these 
updates have been made:
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#q75
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#tr-end

          Mez




From:
"Mary Ellen Zurko" <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com >
To:
"Timothy Hahn" < Timothy_Hahn%IBMUS@notesdev.ibm.com>
Cc:
public-wsc-wg@w3.org
Date:
12/14/2007 11:30 AM
Subject:
usecases comments Re: Comments on draft documents posted to the WSC wiki






I find the following comments to be NOT editorial changes, requiring the 
creation of an Issue if you want them tracked, discussed, and put into the 
final version: 

Unintended Destination comment - please flesh it out to a full proposal. 

Your comment format irritatingly truncates the right hand side of the 6.5 
table, so any comments in there (and the one directly after) cannot be 
fully appreciated, or acted on. 

The "smartphone" insertion seems out of the blue. 

"composition from multiple items on the same host" does not seem like a 
straightforward re wording of the text removed. I can't tell myself if 
it's an accurate restatement. 

The data and jar uri comment seems misplaced, and I don't understand it. 

"HTTP header information" comment has no references. 

Ditto for "DNS lookup results". 

In this context, "installed extensions" seems like an oxymoron, since 
other items there have used "installed" to mean "pre installed with the 
browser". 

Any comments with a "?" need a concrete proposal. 


I find all OTHER comments to be editorial. The suggestion on a XSS 
reference can be satisfied with a link to Wikipedia's article on it. On 
those, I'm starting the "consensus" time clock. Silence for an extended 
period of time will imply it, at which point that will signal the decision 
to incorporate them. 

         Mez


From:
Timothy Hahn/Durham/IBM@IBMUS
To:
<public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
Date:
11/28/2007 03:11 PM
Subject:
Comments on draft documents posted to the WSC wiki






Hi all, 

I have read the latest draft documents and placed comments via attachments 
into the group's wiki.  See this page for links: 
http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/wiki/DocsRepository 

Regards, 
Tim Hahn
IBM Distinguished Engineer

Internet: hahnt@us.ibm.com
Internal: Timothy Hahn/Durham/IBM@IBMUS
phone: 919.224.1565     tie-line: 8/687.1565
fax: 919.224.2530