Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > Until there is > some kind of trust framework, I don't suppose that they are likely to > generally believe a lot of metadata (historically their approach has > been not to trust individual metadata, and it has worked as an > anti-spam technique to a certain extent). > It occurs to me that this is where the missing-in-action EARL would (should!) come to play, especially if there were the ability to somehow "digitally sign" the EARL report with a trusted certificate - be it either a "hard-core" code-signing certificate or even a light-weight PGP or Thawte style email signing certificate - any type of 3rd party, trusted authority certificate would suffice. The simple fact that a person is prepared to put their name on the line in the assertion of "accessibility" would go a long way, IMHO, to establish that trust. Hello EARL, where are you? JF -- John Foliot foliot@wats.ca Web Accessibility Specialist WATS.ca - Web Accessibility Testing and Services http://www.wats.ca Phone: 1-613-482-7053Received on Wednesday, 26 July 2006 14:01:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:28 UTC