In your previous mail you wrote: As a preliminary note, I will suggest to you that your quoting conventions ... => as I can't see a difference between mine and yours I suggest to address this in private.
> > This claim requires an adequate operationalization of "privacy". What > > exactly does one mean by this? Most of the claims I hear about it, > > including a number of the windy assertions that there is a fundamental > > right (whatever that is) to it, seem never to state what exactly it is > > supposed to mean. > > => it is in the European Convention on Human Rights as a legal > principle so there is at least a basis but I am afraid it won't really > help. As a (French) lawyer explained to me one day, a legal text must be > as less accurate as possible so it can be applied to more than one > particular case so a legal principle... => I (mis?)interpreted your message as asking for a formal definition of the term "privacy" so I tried to answer. > PS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights > (see the article 8 about privacy). Yes, of course. We should base new policies on the official opinion of all the people who can be bothered to work on Wikipedia articles. => you are free to follow the pointer to the text itself and not stop at the comments which, I agree, can't be blindly assume as impartial. Regards francis.dup...@fdupont.fr _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
