- From: Shane M Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 20:02:34 +0000
- To: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Walter, We're attempting to build a document that says "this is what you do when DNT:1" - not a document on how to manage all privacy issues everywhere. That perspective continues to slow down the progress of the group. - Shane -----Original Message----- From: Walter van Holst [mailto:walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 12:42 PM To: public-tracking@w3.org Subject: Re: Issue 24 - Consensus On 24/10/2013 20:59, Shane M Wiley wrote: > David, > > The initial language already provides for that perspective (paragraph > 1). We already call out the concepts of data minimization (don't > collect/retain all data all the time) and data proportionality for all > Permitted Uses. The additional language I'm asking to be removed is > wasteful in that context, overemphasizes a dimension of minimization > that won't be used much in reality, and is redundant to the concepts > already asked to be employed for all Permitted Uses, and unneedfully > makes the document longer and more difficult to read. Shane, I am happy to drop the language on graduated response provided that the principle of data proportionality applies under *all* circumstances, including DNT:0 and DNT:unset. Regards, Walter
Received on Thursday, 24 October 2013 20:03:55 UTC