Re: Additional documentation for Issue-229

Hi Jack,

I've added this change proposal to the wiki of change proposals on issue-10 regarding party definition:
http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Party_Definitions#Proposal_.287.29:_Affiliate_list_available_through_more_than_one_action

I suggest that we can close this issue as a duplicate of issue-10, which is currently tracking this topic.

Also, is it possible that we can combine this proposal with the suggestion from Amy Colando and Chris Pedigo about making the affiliate list an example rather than a strict requirement? Are there participants who could accept one but not the other?

http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Party_Definitions#Proposal_.282.29:_Make_affiliate_list_an_example

Thanks,
Nick

On October 16, 2013, at 5:42 PM, Jack Hobaugh <jack@networkadvertising.org> wrote:

> Issue-229
> 
> Normative:
> 
> Replace “single user interaction” with “user interaction”
> 
>  
> Justification:
> 
> The easily discoverable standard for providing notice does not necessarily require a “single” user interaction in all cases.  It is not unreasonable to require more than a single interaction in some cases as long as the notice remains easily discoverable.
> 
> -- 
> Jack L. Hobaugh Jr
> Network Advertising Initiative | Counsel & Senior Director of Technology 
> 1634 Eye St. NW, Suite 750 Washington, DC 20006
> P: 202-347-5341 | jack@networkadvertising.org