Proposal to reconsider resolution to issue 420

Hello,

At the 20 December teleconference [1], we resolved for issue 420 [2]
not to make any change to checkpoint 8.3 regarding prompting before
following a fee link. This is a request to reconsider that decision.

In the 23 October draft [3], the checkpoint reads:

  8.3 Render in a distinct style those links that have been 
      marked up to indicate that following them will involve a 
      fee and allow the user to configure this style. 
      For graphical viewports, offer at least three
      rendering options, including colors and fonts.
      Allow the user to select from among the range of system
      colors and fonts.

Here's why I think the decision should be reconsidered:

 - We argued that since this is not a pervasive problem 
   today on the Web in terms of *user agent responsibilities*, 
   it was not urgent to address with a prompting requirement 
   in UAAG 1.0. 

 - However, this is done today using plug-ins. In fact,
   the 25 August 1999 Micropayments Working Draft [4] states:

    <BLOCKQUOTE>
    For current browsers, embedding information in HTML 
    pages MUST be done using a Per Fee Link Handler, which
    MUST  be a plug-in or JAVA Applet.
    </BLOCKQUOTE>

 - 8.3 and 8.X (proposed below) don't apply for formats 
   that don't allow authors to mark up fee links.
   "Fee link" is a role of content that cannot be recognized 
   in HTML, for example. Thus, 8.3 and 8.x do not impose
   additional burdens on existing browsers.

 - If feel links are not used widely today, and browsers
   don't yet implement these features, we should be ahead of
   the curve and ensure that we require them to do the
   right thing now. I recognize that we need implementation 
   experience to see whetherexisting plug-ins allow 
   configuration to prompt users before charging them.
 
 - It is always possible to claim conformance with the
   addition of a plug-in that supports fee links.

Thus, after reflection, I support the reviewer's 
suggestion (which the WG agreed was a good idea) and 
believe that:

 1) It's a P2 requirement to prevent activation of a link
    that may involve a fee.

 2) It's a P3 requirement to inform the user through style
    that following a link may involve a fee.

Therefore I propose:

 1) Changing 8.3 to a P3 checkpoint.

 2) Adding the following P2 checkpoint:

  8.X Allow configuration so the user is prompted to confirm
      the activation of any link that has been marked up to
      indicate that following it will involve a fee.

Comments:

 a) Checkpoint 8.5 already allows the user to query links for
    information about fees.
 
 - Ian

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0430.html
[2] http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#420
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-UAAG10-20001023/
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-Micropayment-Markup-19990825 
-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

Received on Friday, 29 December 2000 15:14:05 UTC