- From: Ian Fette <ifette@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:26:37 -0800
- To: "Timothy Hahn" <hahnt@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <bbeaa26f0801232226s432f764bu7ca2ef17539584dc@mail.gmail.com>
By saying that a user agent MAY elect not to display the indicator, but that it SHOULD display the indicator, we're saying we think it's useful, but if one wants to ignore that go ahead. I don't think that I'm yet willing to go along and say that I think it's useful. I really want to know what a person is supposed to do when they see this indicator. If they see 3/4 bars, what do they do? If they see a meter that's somewhere towards the right, what do they do? God forbid they see a "78" and have to figure that out. None of these representations seem like a good idea to me, and until we can come up with an indicator that is actually going to inform user action, I really don't think we be saying SHOULD about any of this, with the possible exception of noticing a change. Let's say that I go to my company's webmail, and it has 2/4 bars. I'm still going to log in. Let's say I go to a e-commerce site and it has 3/4 bars. What does that mean? Is it safe or not? (and I seriously doubt that anyone is going to take on the liability of an indicator that answers that question in a binary fashion, which is the only way this might be useful, if we actually had the data to make that decision which we do not). This still seems way too strong to me. On Jan 23, 2008 6:46 PM, Timothy Hahn <hahnt@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > Ian, > > In addition to the level of indirection I referred to below, I also added > this clause: > > > > The user agent MAY elect to display a visual indicator in primary > chrome > > > only when a change in "security confidence estimate" values is > observed. > > > > > I added this upon reflection of your and Jonathan's comments on the 16 > January call where you seemed to desire to not always show a visual > indicator. > > I still believe that some type of meter that has more than 0/1 gradations > is better than a meter that is binary and also better than no meter at all. > > 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 > > > > From: "Ian Fette" <ifette@google.com> > To: Timothy Hahn/Durham/IBM@IBMUS > Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org > Date: 01/23/2008 05:24 PM > Subject: Re: ACTION-374 - proposed re-written text for 6.3, Page Security > Score > > ------------------------------ > > > > I think that what I was saying on the call, and I heard the same from > at least Johnathan, was that it's unclear what it means even if you > have a dial, or "3 bars out of 4". At the end, it doesn't help me > decide whether to proceed or not. The indirection didn't solve this > problem. > > On Jan 23, 2008 2:13 PM, Timothy Hahn <hahnt@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > Ian, > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > I tried to express a level of indirection between what is displayed (I > > referred to this as a "visual indicator") and the value itself (which I > > referred to as the "value"). This indirection was meant to allow for a > > difference between what is displayed and the "raw score" value itself. > > > > I welcome suggestions on making this more clear in the write-up. > > > > Relative to your desire for MAY vs. SHOULD - given the different > opinions of > > the people that have been discussing this, I made the bold decision that > > SHOULD seemed appropriate. > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > From: "Ian Fette" <ifette@google.com> > > To: > > Timothy Hahn/Durham/IBM@IBMUS > > Cc: > > public-wsc-wg@w3.org > > Date: 01/23/2008 04:55 PM > > > > Subject: Re: ACTION-374 - proposed re-written text for 6.3, Page > Security > > Score > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > I'm still unclear on the following two points: > > > > The user agent SHOULD provide a visual indicator in primary chrome > > which varies relative to the "security confidence estimate" value. > > Examples of such visual indicators (non-normative) are gauges, > > thermometers, a selection of several textual descriptions, and > > color-gradations. > > > > The visual indicator SHOULD be especially conspicuous in display when > > the "security confidence estimate" value is different than the value > > which was observed for the loaded page in previous visits to the > > loaded page. > > > > It sounds to me like there was a lot of agreement on the call that > > changes in this score might be informative. I don't think there was > > any agreement that the raw score itself was informative. I don't > > understand why we're saying that the score SHOULD be indicated in > > primary chrome, nor do I understand why it makes sense to show it if > > the score has changed (i.e. "Hey, this was 78 and now it's 68" - > > "Great, what does that mean"). I think it may make sense (MAY) to call > > out what changed, but calling out the score (either normally, or even > > when it changes) still makes no sense to me. > > > > I would love to see these SHOULD -> MAY > > > > -Ian > > > > On Jan 23, 2008 10:41 AM, Timothy Hahn <hahnt@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > > To Mez: > > > > > > I agree with your proposal and will make that be so in the draft. > > > > > > To Mike: > > > > > > While I, myself, would prefer stronger language, I worded the updates > per > > > the discussion from the group (during the weekly conference call as > well > > as > > > on the mailing list). > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Mary Ellen Zurko/Westford/IBM@IRIS > > > To: > > > Timothy Hahn/Durham/IBM@IBMUS > > > Cc: > > > public-wsc-wg@w3.org > > > Date: 01/23/2008 01:29 PM > > > Subject: Re: ACTION-374 - proposed re-written text for 6.3, Page > > Security > > > Score > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > I propose that you also change the title of the section to "Security > > > Confidence Estimate" > > > > > > Mez > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: > > > Timothy Hahn/Durham/IBM@IBMUS > > > To: > > > public-wsc-wg@w3.org > > > Date: > > > 01/23/2008 11:29 AM > > > Subject: ACTION-374 - proposed re-written text for 6.3, Page > Security > > Score > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > From last week's meeting (16 January 2008) I took an action to > propose > > > re-written text for the "Page Security Score" section. > > > > > > From the latest wsc-xit draft, the current text reads: > > > > > > --- Start --- > > > 6.3 Page Security Score > > > > > > See also: ISSUE-129 > > > > > > Please refer to the following entries in the Working Group's Wiki for > > > relevant background information: > RecommendationDisplayProposals/PageScore > > > > > > The user agent MUST reduce the state of all security context > information > > > made available to a single value. A partial order MUST be defined on > the > > set > > > of possible values. > > > > > > The user agent MUST make the security context information value > available > > to > > > the end user, in either primary or secondary chrome. > > > > > > The user agent MUST make the formula by which the value is calculated > > > available to the end user. Documentation of the user agent is the > > likeliest > > > place. > > > > > > The form of the indicator of this value will depend on the user agent > and > > > end user abilities. The user agent SHOULD provide a a primary chrome > > > indicator > > > > > > --- End --- > > > > > > Here is my proposed re-written text: > > > > > > --- Start --- > > > 6.3 Page Security Score > > > > > > See also: ISSUE-129 > > > > > > Please refer to the following entries in the Working Group's Wiki for > > > relevant background information: > RecommendationDisplayProposals/PageScore > > > > > > The user agent SHOULD provide a means of reducing the collection of > > security > > > context information which is available for any loaded page to a > numeric > > > value (termed a "security confidence estimate"). > > > > > > The calculation algorithm for the "security confidence estimate" MAY > be > > made > > > selectable by the end user or offered by separately installed user > agent > > > plug-ins. > > > > > > The user agent SHOULD provide a visual indicator in primary chrome > which > > > varies relative to the "security confidence estimate" value. > Examples of > > > such visual indicators (non-normative) are gauges, thermometers, a > > selection > > > of several textual descriptions, and color-gradations. > > > > > > The visual indicator SHOULD be especially conspicuous in display when > the > > > "security confidence estimate" value is different than the value > which > > was > > > observed for the loaded page in previous visits to the loaded page. > > > > > > The user agent MAY elect to display a visual indicator in primary > chrome > > > only when a change in "security confidence estimate" values is > observed. > > > > > > The user agent MUST make the details of all available security > context > > > information available to the end user, in either primary or secondary > > > chrome. > > > > > > If a "security confidence estimate" is provided, the provider of the > > > implementation MUST make the calculation algorithm by which the > "security > > > confidence estimate" value is calculated available to the end user. > > > Documentation for the user agent or plug-in which is employed is the > > > likeliest place. > > > > > > The visual realization of the "security confidence estimate" value > will > > > depend on the user agent and end user abilities. > > > > > > --- End --- > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > [attachment "smime.p7s" deleted by Mary Ellen Zurko/Westford/IBM] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2008 06:26:50 UTC