Re: tracking-ISSUE-276: normativity of graduated response language [TCS Last Call]

We spent a long time coming up with the current language we have on graduated response, in a way that would be informative (with examples of different kinds) and in a way that is acceptable to all parties in the Working Group. We are not interested in repeating that conversation at this time; the comment does not provide a reason to re-open that conversation. For what it's worth, it's not clear how "SHOULD be preferred" and "is preferred" will be treated differently in practice.

Proposal: no change.

See also: issue-24.

—npd

> On Nov 5, 2015, at 10:44 PM, Tracking Protection Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> tracking-ISSUE-276: normativity of graduated response language [TCS Last Call]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/276
> 
> Raised by: Rob van Eijk
> On product: TCS Last Call
> 
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking-comments/2015Oct/att-0003/20151001_Ares_2015_4048580_W3C_compliance.pdf
>> ‘When feasible, a graduated response to a detected security incident is preferred over widespread data collection’ to a normative requirement (i.e., ‘(...) SHOULD be preferred (...)’).