No more than you shouldn't be reading email :-) I take this notion of a July deadline seriously... On Jul 4, 2013, at 3:33 PM, JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com> wrote: > Shouldn't you be cooking barbecue? :-) > From: John Simpson > Sent: 7/4/2013 3:24 PM > To: Jack Hobaugh; Marc Groman; Mike Zaneis; Shane Wiley > Cc: public-tracking@w3.org List > Subject: De-identifed data > > Colleagues, > > I am trying to understand the implications of you proposed definition of de-identified data. Could you please: > > 1. Explain how you definition differs from the June draft and the significance of the differences. In other words in what ways would a data set considered as de-identified by your definition not count as de-identified by the definition in the June draft. > > 2. Provide several in non-normative language some specific uses cases of what techniques would count as de-identified data under your definition and what would not? > > > Regards, > John
Received on Thursday, 4 July 2013 22:45:01 UTC