Ian Hickson wrote: > On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Barclay, Daniel wrote: >> Section 4.12.2.1 says: >> >> It allows the paranoid user to disable the notifications without losing >> the >> underlying link functionality. >> >> Shouldn't "paranoid user" be something like "privacy-conscious user"? > > No, because a privacy-conscious user would realise that this doesn't > actually do much for his privacy.
No? You seem to be referred to _sufficiently_informed_ privary-conscious users. For others who care but aren't sufficiently informed, is it really appropriate for the specification to call them paranoid? > It's a bit like turning off third-party > cookies. It makes people feel good if they don't understand what's > actually going on, but it has very little impact on actual user privacy. Could you provide a pointer? Daniel -- (Plain text sometimes corrupted to HTML "courtesy" of Microsoft Exchange.)
