Re: ISSUE-4 (privacy-geopriv): GEOPRIV WG proposal for privacy within the API


On Mar 26, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Doug Turner wrote:

> matt, I am confused.

Sorry for the confusion, I thought I spelled out clear enough what was  
going to happen in the thread on issue-2 [1].
> Issue-2:  Sounds like the tracker for the geopriv proposal we voted  
> down.  if so, can we close
> Issue-4:  Sounds like the same as issue-2.  Is this a dup?
> We all have spent dozens of hours on Geopriv.  We voted it down at  
> the f2f.  UAs that were present were either on the fence or directly  
> in opposition.

We resolved to publish without including the proposal [2], but that's  
good enough.  I'm fine with the chairs closing it (especially given  
John's message earlier [3]), but as I said before we still need the  

> Maybe the only real issue that our WG has is to respond to the IETF  
> letter, and move on.






Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 18:34:30 UTC