W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > June 2012

Re: ISSUE-16, ACTION-166: define (data) collection

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 19:21:30 +0200
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <3766379.V2tFjUjzJ0@hegel.sophia.w3.org>
Roy, 

you were complaining about the fact that being "exposed" to data is often 
interpreted as "collection". A definition that is tautologic doesn't solve 
your issue. A definition that imports hairy problems of identification into 
the definition isn't buying you peace either. So I suggest to define 
"collection" for the sake of both Specifications as a process of the fact of 
receiving, storing into memory and processing data for purposes other then 
erasing. 

BTW, the definition of collection is just that. It doesn't say anything 
about the collection being legitimate or not. This is subject to other parts 
and rules. 

Rigo

On Wednesday 30 May 2012 00:40:17 Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> If we go completely general, there is no need for a definition:
> data collection is the process of collecting data, where
> collecting is defined by any dictionary.
> 
>  http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/collect%5B1%5D
> 
> That's fine with me.  It is far better than what is proposed in
> the current spec.  But it is a bit misleading to say that we are
> constraining data collection in general.
Received on Friday, 1 June 2012 17:21:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:30 UTC