Re: ISSUE-96: Should support for logotypes be a SHOULD or a MAY? [Techniques]

I heard something about a straw poll during the call though, and either way
I'm going to put my $.02 in.

One thing I worry about a lot of the proposals in the current draft is that
we are expecting browsers and other UAs to give up a ton of screen
real-estate. Browsers already take up a ton of real-estate as it is, and if
you put something in a browser, it's almost impossible to take it out. We
had this discussion back in New York (march 06 or whatever it was). I'm
extremely reluctant to say that browsers SHOULD give up screen real-estate
when we have no data to say that it's going to solve the problem (or even
help in a meaningful way). As such, I would vote against a proposal
containing SHOULD, because I fear that it would make people write off the
whole document as unrealistic. And what about a mobile browser? Do you think
that on my 320x240 resolution phone that a browser SHOULD take up 100x50
pixels to display the subject, issuer, and a logo? I don't....

OK, so maybe that was $.03, but I won't charge you the extra penny ;-)

On 8/9/07, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 2007-08-09 12:38:51 -0400, Johnathan Nightingale wrote:
>
> > My opinion, as expressed on the call, is that it should be MAY in
> > both cases.  I don't think we should mandate (MUST) or even
> > recommend (SHOULD) the use of identity signals which currently
> > have no standardized validation methodology.  I think it's
> > entirely appropriate and worthwhile, however, to call logotype
> > support to the attention of would-be implementors, should they
> > elect to use it (MAY).
>
> The counter-argument would be that, for a lot of other information
> in certificates, there isn't that good "standardized" validation
> technology, either, and that the only thing thate actually matters
> is that some CA is willing to vouch for whatever statement is made.
>
> > Is this the straw poll Mez wanted?
>
> Not necessarily. ;-)
>
> I simply entered the open questions as issues, as I had indicated
> toward the end of the call, to keep track of them.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
>
>