[WG-InfoSharing] Review CR 1.1.0 DRAFT 5

Mark Lizar mark at openconsent.com
Sat Oct 28 03:54:06 UTC 2017


(Deep Bow) 

Thanks David for the great editing work. 

Mark 




> On 27 Oct 2017, at 18:17, David Turner <david.turner at voltagegate.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello All, 
> 
> DRAFT 5 is now on the wiki:
> Marked up version - Consent Receipt Specification 1_1_0 DRAFT 5a.docx <https://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/download/attachments/76447870/Consent%20Receipt%20Specification%201_1_0%20DRAFT%205a.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1508987029000&api=v2>
> Clean version - Consent Receipt Specification 1_1_0 DRAFT 5a - clean.docx <https://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/download/attachments/76447870/Consent%20Receipt%20Specification%201_1_0%20DRAFT%205a%20-%20clean.docx?version=1&modificationDate=1508987041000&api=v2>
> JSON schema - CR Schema v1_1_0 DRAFT 5.json <https://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/download/attachments/76447870/CR%20Schema%20v1_1_0%20DRAFT%205.json?version=1&modificationDate=1508987053000&api=v2>
> 
> Please submit your comments and proposed changes to this list using a marked-up version of the Word doc or a description that uses the document's line numbers.If you want something changed or added, please provide a specific proposal for the changed/new text. It is not sufficient to say, "this paragraph requires elaboration"
> without suggesting new text.
> 
> The deadline for this round of comments is Nov 9. 
> ---------------------------------------------
> I want to highlight a few things:
> I made significant changes to the layout and structure of the document:
> Table 1 and Table 2 have been combined into a single list; and
> All normative parts of the document are now in one section.  
> I added some "editor's comments" to the document. They are the bright yellow text boxes with a red border. They are meant to highlight specific issues.
> One issue I want to call out is my proposal for changing the section of the schema for 'purpose'. (This is the same as the editor's comment at line 355.) I propose changing ‘purposes’ to type: object, creating a new element called ‘purpose’, type: object, and renaming the current ‘purpose’ element to ‘purposeDesc’. This will give a cleaner and less ambiguous JSON structure.
> 
> -----------------------------------
> Current structure:
> 
> purposes
>     purposeDesc
>     consentType
>     etc.
>     purposeDesc
>     consentType
>     etc.
> -----------------------------------
> Proposed structure:
> 
> purposes
>     purpose
>         purposeDesc
>         consentType
>         etc.
>     purpose
>         purposeDesc
>         consentType
>         etc.
> -----------------------------------
> 
> I'm also proposing we do the same for "piiController' and 'service".
> 
> David
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WG-InfoSharing mailing list
> WG-InfoSharing at kantarainitiative.org
> https://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-infosharing

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kantarainitiative.org/pipermail/wg-infosharing/attachments/20171027/6c8ffe3a/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the WG-InfoSharing mailing list