ISSUE-36

presentation norms -- no oneSizeFitsAll (from public comments)

State:

CLOSED

Product:

wsc-usecases

Raised by:

Bill Doyle

Opened on:

2007-04-15

Description:

From public comments
raised by: Al Gilman Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-usable-
authentication/2007Apr/0000.html

presentation norms -- no oneSizeFitsAll
where it says, in 2.3 Consistent presentation of security information
The Working Group will recommend a set of terms, indicators and
metaphors for consistent presentation of security information to
users, across all web user agents. For each of these items, the
Working Group will describe the intended user interpretation, as
well as safe actions the user may respond with in common use cases.
please consider
The desired user interpretation of decisions and evidence are fundamental;
this belongs in the model. It should not be limited to the \'normal mode\'
dialog that is in the projection of the full model that is discussed above.
The presentation suggestions may be limited to the \'normal mode\' projection.
But what the user should understand if they drill down deeper or skim more
lightly should be covered, not limited to the suggested summary dialog. Yes,
you want to introduce some terms and icons and the like whose consistent use
will enhance recognition of security information when it crosses the user\'s
bow. But these are not the only prosodic tools that should be used to convey
this role in the web-dialog scene or world-let.
Why?
In consideration of the diverse presentation and actuation bindings that are
required so that people with disabilities are afforded access to information
devices and services, realize that it is essential to define the intended
interpretation, which is of broad applicability, and then under specified
modality conditions indicate suggested representations.
Please consider
The IMS Global Learning Consortium has established a baseline of metadata for
both content and personal preferences. Even \'though there is still contention
as to how single-sign-on should work, it is very broadly agreed that we need
this. Single-sign-on will give us a convenient way to manage the affordance
of portable, personal preferences to qualifying sites. Where these
preferences are available, they should in particular be used up front to
condition the presentation of any sign-on dialog. Single-sign-on with the
identity host brokering not only user authentication but presentation
preferences is too important a user case for people with disabilities for this
use case to be left out of your plans, even if single-sign-on is not yet
pervasive in Web practice.

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

1. ISSUE-36: presentation norms -- no oneSizeFitsAll (from public comments) (from Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com on 2007-05-10)
2. Re: ISSUE-36: presentation norms -- no oneSizeFitsAll (from public comments) (from Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com on 2007-04-17)
3. RE: ISSUE-36: presentation norms -- no oneSizeFitsAll (from public comments) (from ryonaitis@hisoftware.com on 2007-04-17)
4. ISSUE-36: presentation norms -- no oneSizeFitsAll (from public comments) (from dean+cgi@w3.org on 2007-04-15)

Related notes:

Display change log