- From: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie@research.att.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 09:14:17 -0400
- To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Cc: public-p3p-spec@w3.org
On Monday, August 18, 2003, at 05:45 AM, Rigo Wenning wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 02:37:48PM -0400, Lorrie Cranor wrote: >> Maybe we should change to "Find out how to opt-in or opt-out at" > > What about opt-in/out (shorter ;) But not very meaningful. >> >>> >>> ===================================================================== >>> == >>> <ACCESS><all /> >>> >>> It says: We give you access to all of our information that identifies >>> you >>> >> The definition of <all/> is restricted to "identified data" so "about >> you" seems to broad? > > But I find the 'identifies' a bit difficult because they have that > profile and now it identifies me ;). 'about you' is much more natural > and semantically works well with what we want to express. What you mean > is more of 'might be able to find out about you', which would work with > 'identifiable'. I agree that "about you" sounds better. But semantically it is wrong. You have it backwards. What I mean is information that we have identified with you (identified, not identifiable). >> >>> ===================================================================== >>> == >>> >>> <NON-IDENTIFIABLE> >>> >> The definition of this element includes both the case that the info is >> not collected and the case that it is collected but anonymized before >> being stored. That's why we use the term "keep" rather than >> "collect." > > In this case, non-identifiable and non-ident are semantically equal > expressions in the user-interface. > That's what I want to prevent as non-identifiable is really much > stronger as non-ident in retention. Remember, non-ident is only about > identified data and not identifiable data. Well the semantic difference should be that non-ident is about "identified" data and non-identifiable is about "identifiable" data. I think the user interface expressions we are proposing make the correct distinction. If you want to change "keep" somewhere, arguably it would be better to change the "keep" in "nonident" to "collect" since that's the word used in the definition -- but I think its ok the way it is. Lorrie
Received on Monday, 18 August 2003 09:45:07 UTC