Re: language matters [formerly Re: WoN Re: Public consultation on EU digital principles]

“There is also the issue with whitelist and blacklist that they are based on the notion that white is good, while black is bad.”
>>You only have to look as far as the Emmy-winning TV series on ABC :-)


Best regards,

Jim

_______________

[Image]

Jim St.Clair

Chief Trust Officer

jim.stclair@lumedic.io<mailto:jim.stclair@lumedic.io> | 228-273-4893<tel:228-273-4893>

Let’s meet to discuss patient identity exchange: https://calendly.com/jim-stclair-1

________________________________
From: Brent Zundel <brent.zundel@evernym.com>
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2021 8:47:07 AM
To: public-credentials@w3.org <public-credentials@w3.org>
Cc: W3C Credentials CG (Public List) <public-credentials@w3.org>
Subject: language matters [formerly Re: WoN Re: Public consultation on EU digital principles]


CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.


I would like to echo Orie and also add my encouragement that we avoid using the terms blacklist and whitelist and replace them with denylist and allowlist.

Language matters. My hope is that folks will try to be careful with their language. Making this small change could have more of an impact than you realize.

There are a good number of non-native english speakers for whom the meaning of whitelist and blacklist is not clear the way the meaning of allowlist and denylist is.

There is also the issue with whitelist and blacklist that they are based on the notion that white is good, while black is bad. I am not saying that those who use blacklist and whitelist are biased in their views. I do not believe that this is true at all. But the words themselves are based on a biased notion which we would do well to not perpetuate, especially when we have a viable alternative.

--
Brent Zundel, Evernym
Principle Cryptography Engineer