RE: Private User Agent Community Group Proposed

Thank you, this is a very good idea.  The word 'privacy' could be removed
from the proposal and this would not affect the intent of the proposal.

'No Covert Shared State User Agent Community Group' (NCSSUA CG) would
be fine with me, but perhaps there are more terse suggestions?

cheers
Fred

> From: ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net
> To: public-privacy@w3.org
> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:11:21 -0400
> Subject: Re: Private User Agent Community Group Proposed
> 
> I share the concerns expressed by Rigo and others, however if this:
> 
> > The proposed scope of the PUA CG is very narrow and will focus only
> > on the technical issues involved in identifying and addressing the leaks
> > at the UA and trying to mitigate loss of functionality caused by any
> > restrictions.
> 
> were expressed as a program to identify the mechanism(s) by which state
> is shared, with an intent to specify a no-(covert)-shared-state UA I would
> be less concerned.
> 
> My preference is to avoid jurisdictionally, even ideologically scoped terms
> of which "privacy" is a wicked good example.
> 
> Eric
>