- From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 14:50:57 +0200
- To: Louis-Francois Pau <LPau@rsm.nl>
- Cc: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, public-privacy06ws@w3.org
On 2007-05-21 23:56:12 +0200, Louis-François Pau wrote: > I am afraid that making the subject of negotiation etc..just > something which is a "relevant technology" is not enough in view > precisely of the focus on architectural ,language and application > consequences. What motivates the IG in the first place is how diverse policy languages and requirements interact and can be combined; I'd hope that that's clear from the charter. > Subject of course to other opinions , it would be much more > explicit to say that the privacy language work in the IG will > include needed functionalities to support in these languages > privacy negotiations and evaluation as well as diverse end > requirements by individuals . The reference to diversity is the > key point in my earlier comments . Furthermore with reference to > the "use cases" the text should explicitely mention the > satisfaction of individual end user needs and of private > information user's benefits . You seem to have a specific wording proposal in mind. Mind proposing some concrete edits to the text? My current take is that the scope as outlined in the present draft covers the points that you want to discuss. I certainly can't come up with an example for something that would be deemed in scope according to the your remarks, and out of scope according to the current text. (Bear in mind that this is the charter for an *Interest* Group, not a Working Group; the purpose here is to provide a platform for community building and discussion that might at some point in the future lead to actual standardization work.) Regards, -- Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2007 12:51:00 UTC