Re: New Change Proposal for Issue-10: remove party definitions

Hi Justin,

On 2013-10-08 5:57 PM, Justin Brookman wrote:
>> I agree the current draft is highly context dependent. In fact, 
>> that's my point. It's all context dependent, yet it's written in 
>> terms of parties. The rules apply to context and data, not to 
>> parties, especially since parties change or data is passed between 
>> parties. By defining the rules in terms of context, we make the rules 
>> much clearer.
> Thanks, David, this is helpful.  If I understand it correctly, nearly 
> all of this is editorial then.  You would still need definitions of 
> "first party" and "third party" but they would be adjectives (to 
> describe context) instead of nouns.

If this change is editorial, and it makes the spec clearer, is there 
anything holding us back from making the change? I can propose specific 
edits, if that will help.


Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 20:28:25 UTC