W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-p3p-spec@w3.org > February 2004

Re: linked

From: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie@cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:03:12 -0500
Message-Id: <C4B110F9-60B2-11D8-935B-000A95DA3F5A@cs.cmu.edu>
Cc: 'public-p3p-spec' <public-p3p-spec@w3.org>
To: Giles Hogben <giles.hogben@jrc.it>

On Feb 16, 2004, at 4:59 AM, Giles Hogben wrote:

> Some comments:
> 1. I don't think the requirement that it be stored as a particular 
> database
> record is valid. I think that linkability should be described 
> independently
> of the technical architecture used. This is why I tried to describe it 
> in
> terms of the intentions and proportionality.

This actually goes to the heart I what I was trying to do... I wanted 
to define "linkable" independently of technical architecture but define 
"linked" more narrowly. So far I haven't come up with an example of an 
architecture in which we would want to say that data is linked and does 
not involve either triggering a database retrieval or storage. Perhaps 
you have an example?

> 2. You do not mention the use of referers to link cookies together.

I will add that.

> 3. I think the examples given are simpler than those I gave.

Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

Received on Monday, 16 February 2004 14:02:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:18 UTC