Re: fyi: Cross-Origin Resource Embedding Restrictions

On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 22:39:55 +0200, Jonathan Rees  
<jar@creativecommons.org> wrote:
> Since the restrictions are assumed voluntarily by the user-agent
> because of its interest in complying with the desires of content
> publishers, whether as a matter of goodwill, contract, or legislation,
> "restriction" is not a good word to use, since it sounds like
> something the publisher is empowered to do. How about a title
> involving "compliance" or "exclusion"?
>
> Cross-Origin Resource Embedding Compliance Assistance
> Cross-Origin Resource Embedding Policy Compliance
> Cross-Origin Resource Embedding Exclusion
> Cross-Origin Resource Embedding Exclusion Protocol   [thanks to ml@cc
> for this one]
>
> or something along those lines?

I went for "Exclusion".


> And as we discussed maybe soften the word "enforcement" where it
> occurs in the text. Maybe "checking" instead.

Done, also avoided using "restrictions" in the text.

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/from-origin/raw-file/tip/Overview.html

For a unified diff see:

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/from-origin/rev/27b62874e8e0


Thanks for your suggestions!


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/

Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2011 15:01:35 UTC