Re: Agenda: WSC WG distributed meeting, Wednesday, 2008-05-28

I'm still in Tokyo - APWG. our 8am meeting is Midnight here in Tokyo, and as
much as I enjoy talking with all of you, I don't enjoy it *that* much ;-) So
regrets. Also, as an FYI, I'm hoping to have the cleaned up minutes from f2f
sent out this weekend. Sorry for the delay, but all the travel (incl this
week in Tokyo) has made my schedule a bit crazier than anticipated.
-Ian

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Joe Steele <steele@adobe.com> wrote:

>  Regrets but I will not be able to attend.
>
> Joe
>
>
> On 5/22/08 3:24 PM, "Mary Ellen Zurko" <Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> [I'm taking a very long weekend, and won't be back at work until the day of
> our next meeting. But I will have email connectivity. See you soon. Mez]
>
>         Web Security Context (WSC) Call Agenda
>
> Calling information:
> Wednesday, 28 May 2008
> 11:00 am - 12:30 pm Eastern time
> *http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/Group/#meetings* <
> http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/Group/#meetings>
> *http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#D20080528* <
> http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#D20071031>
>
>
> Agenda
>
> 1) Pick a scribe
> *http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/Group/cheatsheet#Scribing* <
> http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/Group/cheatsheet#Scribing>
> *http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/scribes* <http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/scribes>
>
> 2) Approve minutes from meetings
>
> 3) Weekly completed action items
> (Usually checkpointed Friday am, US East Coast time)
> [pending review] ACTION-430: Luis Barriga to Write up grammar/spelling
> edits for anil - due 2008-05-20
> [pending review] ACTION-437: Anil Saldhana to Update 7.4.4 to use SHOULD
> instead of [MAY|SHOULD] - due 2008-05-20
> [pending review] ACTION-440: Anil Saldhana to Remove Conformance Labels
> section 3.2 - due 2008-05-20
> [pending review] ACTION-454: Anil Saldhana to Add section 9.2 based on
> issue-205 text - due 2008-05-21
> [pending review] ACTION-459: Anil Saldhana to Do issue-207 - due 2008-05-21
> [pending review] ACTION-464: Anil Saldhana to Merge acknowledgments
> (sections 10 and 2) to 2 - due 2008-05-21
> [pending review] ACTION-468: Anil Saldhana to Make spelling changes in
> ISSUE-209 - due 2008-05-21
> [pending review] ACTION-469: Anil Saldhana to Cut off action433 result
> before the "e.g. by switching to ....." - due 2008-05-21
> [pending review] ACTION-472: Anil Saldhana to Drop "desktop" in 4.2.1 3rd
> and 5th paragraphs - due 2008-05-21
> [pending review] ACTION-473: Anil Saldhana to Add "device manufactures" to
> list in 5.1.1, 2nd paragraphs - due 2008-05-21
> [pending review] ACTION-474: Anil Saldhana to Drop word "desktop" in 7.2
> 1st paragraph - due 2008-05-21
>
> 4) Open Action Items
> http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/track/actions/open <
> http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/track/actions/open>
>
> 5) Action items closed due to inactivity
> None. There's a bunch with overdue deadlines. Please, please,  please
> manage the deadlines on your action items. Please.
>
> 6) Agenda bashing
>
> 7) Test development
> Thomas to lead
> Test plans, sites to test against, test execution, etc.
> Some amount of test planning is needed for CR entry.
> Doing the testing is needed for CR exit.
>
> 8) Next meeting - 04 June 2008
>
> We need to wrap up actions and issues so we can go to last call.
> http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/track/products/4 <
> http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/track/products/4>
> All issues besides 188 and 199 will be closed when their associated actions
> are closed.
> We'll do the final cleanup on 188 and 199 at that time.
>
> Topics for future meetings, carried over from the Oslo agenda:
>
> Conforming Implementations
> Needed for CR exit.
> We may cover this in test development. We'll need at least two conforming
> implementations to test against.
> What's in the pipeline, what can we expect in terms of MUSTs, SHOULDs, etc.
>
> Will we have gaps?
>
> What else beyond June?
> What, if anything, other than taking wsc-xit through LC to CR entry to CR
> exit (to recommendation) would we like to do after June? What would we be
> capable of doing? What should we, or someone like us, do?
> Some ideas:
> o Authoring best practices for (usably) secured sites. Some of the things
> we've wanted to recommend haven't been obviously in the scope of enabling
> security context information for user trust decisions. Should we ask for a
> charter clarification/change or new WG to do this?
> o Dealing with mixed content (there's some feeling that there might be more
> to do here).
> o Providing guidance or expertise to other standards efforts that touch on
> usable security. Can we provide guidance on how to deal with user
> expectations and implications when protocol security is
> designed/standardized? To do? Not to do?
>
>
>
>