- From: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie@cs.cmu.edu>
- Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:03:12 -0500
- To: Giles Hogben <giles.hogben@jrc.it>
- Cc: 'public-p3p-spec' <public-p3p-spec@w3.org>
On Feb 16, 2004, at 4:59 AM, Giles Hogben wrote: > > Some comments: > 1. I don't think the requirement that it be stored as a particular > database > record is valid. I think that linkability should be described > independently > of the technical architecture used. This is why I tried to describe it > in > terms of the intentions and proportionality. This actually goes to the heart I what I was trying to do... I wanted to define "linkable" independently of technical architecture but define "linked" more narrowly. So far I haven't come up with an example of an architecture in which we would want to say that data is linked and does not involve either triggering a database retrieval or storage. Perhaps you have an example? > 2. You do not mention the use of referers to link cookies together. I will add that. > 3. I think the examples given are simpler than those I gave. > Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Lorrie
Received on Monday, 16 February 2004 14:02:35 UTC