Hi Rainer,
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Hillebrand, Rainer
rainer.hillebr...@t-mobile.net wrote:
RH: I would recommend not to standardize a base security policy for all
markets on the world. It would take too long. However, we might want to
discuss for Widgets 2.0 whether we would try
: Dienstag, 24. Februar 2009 23:34
To: Frederick Hirsch
Cc: ext Priestley, Mark, VF-Group; Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston);
public-webapps
Subject: Re: Reminder: January 31 comment deadline for LCWD of Widgets 1.0:
Packaging Configuration spec
Hi Frederick,
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Frederick
Rainer,
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Hillebrand, Rainer
rainer.hillebr...@t-mobile.net wrote:
Dear Marcos,
I have some doubts that a secure transport of a widget resource is so
important in case of a signed widget resource. I would agree with you that we
currently do not know how a
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Hillebrand, Rainer
rainer.hillebr...@t-mobile.net wrote:
Dear Marcos,
In order to detect a man-in-the-middle-attack, a widget resource is signed,
either by an author's certificate that I trust or by an author certificate
and a distributor certificate that I
Caceres
Sent: Montag, 2. März 2009 15:03
To: Hillebrand, Rainer
Cc: public-webapps
Subject: Re: Reminder: January 31 comment deadline for LCWD of Widgets 1.0:
Packaging Configuration spec
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Hillebrand, Rainer
rainer.hillebr...@t-mobile.net wrote:
Dear Marcos
]
Sent: 04 February 2009 17:35
To: Priestley, Mark, VF-Group
Cc: Arthur Barstow; public-webapps
Subject: Re: Reminder: January 31 comment deadline for LCWD of
Widgets 1.0: Packaging Configuration spec
Hi Mark,
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Priestley, Mark, VF-Group
mark.priest...@vodafone.com
Hi Frederick,
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Frederick Hirsch
frederick.hir...@nokia.com wrote:
The Widget Signature spec is not an API definition so probably does not need
to define how signature status information is returned.
You are right, so agreed.
I also agree that it
would be
(was: RE: Reminder:
January 31 comment deadline for LCWD of Widgets 1.0: Packaging
Configuration spec)
Hi Mark,
2009/2/19 Priestley, Mark, VF-Group mark.priest...@vodafone.com:
Hi All,
In the email [1] containing my comments against the LCWD of
Widgets 1.0:
Packaging Configuration spec, I wrote
Hi Mark,
2009/2/19 Priestley, Mark, VF-Group mark.priest...@vodafone.com:
Hi All,
In the email [1] containing my comments against the LCWD of Widgets 1.0:
Packaging Configuration spec, I wrote:
7.10 The access Element
The access element defines a network attribute as A boolean
attribute
2009/2/16 Priestley, Mark, VF-Group mark.priest...@vodafone.com:
No problem.
From
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JanMar/0346.html:
[mp] The hole is that signature files are excluded from the generation
of the signature values in any other signature
deadline for LCWD of
Widgets 1.0: Packaging Configuration spec
Hi Mark,
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Priestley, Mark, VF-Group
mark.priest...@vodafone.com wrote:
Hi Marcos, Art, All,
Please find below Vodafone's comments on the Widgets 1.0: Packaging
and Configuration specification. I have
comment deadline for LCWD of
Widgets 1.0: Packaging Configuration spec
Hi Mark,
2009/2/12 Priestley, Mark, VF-Group mark.priest...@vodafone.com:
[mp] To be clear I was suggesting that access to signatures was
restricted from the widget after installation. I was not suggesting
that they were
Hi Mark,
2009/2/12 Priestley, Mark, VF-Group mark.priest...@vodafone.com:
[mp] To be clear I was suggesting that access to signatures was
restricted from the widget after installation. I was not suggesting that
they were not more generally available. As you say access to signatures
after
.
-Original Message-
From: Marcos Caceres [mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com]
Sent: 04 February 2009 17:35
To: Priestley, Mark, VF-Group
Cc: Arthur Barstow; public-webapps
Subject: Re: Reminder: January 31 comment deadline for LCWD of
Widgets 1.0: Packaging Configuration spec
Hi Mark,
On Thu, Jan 29
Message-
From: Marcos Caceres [mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com]
Sent: 04 February 2009 17:35
To: Priestley, Mark, VF-Group
Cc: Arthur Barstow; public-webapps
Subject: Re: Reminder: January 31 comment deadline for LCWD of
Widgets 1.0: Packaging Configuration spec
Hi Mark,
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6
, Mark, VF-Group
Cc: Arthur Barstow; public-webapps
Subject: Re: Reminder: January 31 comment deadline for LCWD of
Widgets 1.0: Packaging Configuration spec
Hi Mark,
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Priestley, Mark, VF-Group
mark.priest...@vodafone.com wrote:
Hi Marcos, Art, All,
Please find
Hi Mark,
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Priestley, Mark, VF-Group
mark.priest...@vodafone.com wrote:
Hi Marcos, Art, All,
Please find below Vodafone's comments on the Widgets 1.0: Packaging and
Configuration specification. I have divided them into what I consider to
be substantive
-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Arthur Barstow
Sent: 28 January 2009 20:54
To: public-webapps
Subject: Reminder: January 31 comment deadline for LCWD of
Widgets 1.0: Packaging Configuration spec
A reminder for people interested in Widgets specs ...
January 31 is the deadline for comments
A reminder for people interested in Widgets specs ...
January 31 is the deadline for comments for the 22 December 2008 Last
Call Working Draft of the Widgets 1.0: Packaging and Configuration spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-widgets-20081222/
-Regards, Art Barstow
Begin forwarded
19 matches
Mail list logo
