- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 01:00:45 -0700
- To: Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
- Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Justin Brookman <jbrookman@cdt.org>, Heather West <heatherwest@google.com>, "(public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
On Oct 9, 2013, at 12:00 AM, Nicholas Doty wrote: > I have tried to clean up the wiki page for this issue, with some help from Roy and Rob (thanks, guys!). We have 5 numbered proposals (including David's "no change" below), and then I've put next to each other links to the ED and April 30 WD text for reference. > > http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Tracking_Definition > > Roy (and Justin/Heather), would you accept as a friendly amendment to your version of the April 30th WD text that we change from "attributable to" to "associated with"? I think that would match the language we've generally been using and I don't think it changes the intended meaning. Actually, no, attributable is the correct word to use there unless there is a bunch of other words to limit what associates. Absolutely anything can be associated with anything else. I can associate the color blue with Nick. Hence, saying that any data which can be associated with a user is tracking data is the same as saying that all data is tracking data. Note that the way I use "data that can associate" in proposal (1) is okay, but could also be changed to "data that can attribute". ....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 08:01:08 UTC