W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-geolocation@w3.org > June 2009

Re: Geopriv compromise proposal

From: Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 08:16:06 -0700
Cc: Geolocation Working Group WG <public-geolocation@w3.org>, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Message-Id: <7CC6ADBF-FE20-4B9F-BF83-33AD5B21B020@gmail.com>
To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>

heh.  funny noises.  true enough.  just feels that we have been  
discussing the same thing for 8 months -- well before the face to face  
in December.  I hope you understand my frustration at not being able  
to make a decision.  :-)

Also, I hope you understand that the post sounds like the starting  
point of a discussion that Mitchell is having about data.  I do not  
think it would be prudent to draw the line between a framework to  
discuss data and "we must have privacy rules associated with  


On Jun 18, 2009, at 3:47 AM, Rigo Wenning wrote:

> Doug,
> just for the record: What I suggest is absolutely in line with
> http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/07/21/framework-for-discussing-
> data/
> For a dead horse, it is making fun noises..
> Rigo
> On Wednesday 17 June 2009, Doug Turner wrote:
>> We are beating a dead horse.  From the vote a bit ago, it sounds
>> like   no UA is going to implement this sort of meta data along
>> with the position information.
Received on Thursday, 18 June 2009 15:17:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:33:55 UTC