- From: David Singer <singer@mac.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 16:37:31 -0700
- To: Walter van Holst <walter@vanholst.com>
- Cc: public-tracking@w3.org
Yes, Matthias already changed from ‘will’ to ‘may’ at my suggestion (like Shane, I don’t like telling people what their own regulations say), and I think it’s now cautious enough… > On Aug 30, 2016, at 22:10 , Walter van Holst <walter@vanholst.com> wrote: > > On 2016-08-31 05:48, Shane M Wiley wrote: >> I'd recommend you use language that is a bit more cautious and avoids >> speaking to absolutes: > > Maybe it is because I am not a native speaker, but I read "We believe... may..." already as (overly) cautious and completely bereft of absolutes. The facts are that in the European context consent is a requirement and the current practices of cookie shades are neither meaningful nor a good UX. So any less intrusive way to ascertain consent or a lack thereof in a regulatory environment that is keen on consent can be assumed to simplify compliance. No need to introduce phrasing that in some engineering circles might somewhat rudely be labeled as "weasely". > > Regards, > > Walter > Dave Singer singer@mac.com
Received on Thursday, 1 September 2016 23:38:05 UTC