[WG-InfoSharing] MVCR Terminology: Grantee and Grantor -

Iain Henderson iainhenderson at mac.com
Sun Mar 27 04:07:27 CDT 2016


Would consenter and consentee be better?

I think we should stick to the base nouns and verbs if we can.

Iain

> On 27 Mar 2016, at 07:19, Mark Lizar - OCG <m.lizar at openconsentgroup.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi All, 
> 
> - Happy Chocolate (easter) Day — 
> 
> 
> I have noticed that lots of the language in the specification is a bit awkward in that we have been trying to use the ISO 29100 terminology framework of a consent centric specification.  Even though the ISO privacy framework is a very helpful base for terms and concepts it is not consent centric and really available as terms people can grasp and use. 
> 
> In this regard, I have been playing with the terms Grantee and Grantor as operational terms to describe Alice and Bob’s role in the consent . 
> 
> Grantee - being the entity provisioning (or giving) consent - Grantor being the entity that is harvesting the consent ( or taking)  consent. I like grantee, as it embodies a person and has an inherent rights to manage the use of consent post provision. 
> 
> Would there being objection to adding these two terms to the spec and mapping:
> 1. grantee to PI subject, Data subject,
> 2. grantor to PI Controller, Data Controller 
> 
> 
> Kind Regards,
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WG-InfoSharing mailing list
> WG-InfoSharing at kantarainitiative.org
> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-infosharing

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/wg-infosharing/attachments/20160327/173bb95b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the WG-InfoSharing mailing list