RE: Revise network interaction definition issue-217 issue-228

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Nick,
It is important that a network transaction is a single request (and its associated responses). That what was meant when we discussed Option B.  If you try and encompass multiple requests then the definition becomes vague and so useless.
Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicholas Doty [mailto:npdoty@w3.org]
> Sent: 25 November 2013 02:02
> To: public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)
> Subject: Revise network interaction definition issue-217 issue-228
>
> *** gpg4o |  Unknown Signature from 40203EE90BBAB306 1 2 01 1385344914 9
> ***
>
> I haven't seen any additional suggestions/revisions on the network interaction
> definition(s). To a question that came up on the call, I've added what I believe to
> be a friendly clarification to both proposals on the wiki [0], namely that if a term
> isn't ultimately used in a document, then we wouldn't keep the (apparently
> unnecessary) definition. I hope that addresses the concerns raised by Rob and
> Mike.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> [0]
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Revise_network_int
> eraction_definition

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (MingW32)
Comment: Using gpg4o v3.1.107.3564 - http://www.gpg4o.de/
Charset: utf-8

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSkyX3AAoJEHMxUy4uXm2JJMcIAISRgLf1hGKZ0jzvVHGn8UVg
PKB0WtBc+M3izcmi/UEF+CXrxwS/y4fdpHi4x33e3MlVbTikZFPOh/SpFBeP/X2o
JJOdLBFSt4glBgucC3cUMoTB4+ARpmIY6T0LVmJ4aw4PDY96Sra2cLoRy8sjUGVx
DmSc6OA5EjBrIPFl/xTzTuu/10RleDkNtN6Xv/+uTaXX8Rdiwh3qLcxZl9Y4tx3j
AgPrCMcKi5/PSRo/ggvdVWquqYj+3+qd7E0QumBu09BmDBIs3RLAFeFLFDI8Y7/4
8WSkFprGZiN+rqKrkQd6p09tZ18qpTcjk/jWcz27hG8fWFT5z0srQjt9SDw/YVA=
=MdlM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----