> That sounds reasonable to me. I assume that you mean to include the
> definitions of both Target and Device from Section 5.4 of RFC 3693.
I can add the definition of Target from 3693 (note that it is actually
defined twice there, and I'm assuming the one to bring in to geopriv-
arch is the one Hannes quotes below). However, there's one idea in the
existing definition in arch that I think is worth keeping (and that
we've been discussing here): "The Target is the entity whose privacy
Geopriv seeks to protect." So I'd like to keep that in the definition.
> However, I don't think that we need to be as liberal in using
> "Device" over "Target" as you imply. To my mind, "Device" is most
> applicable where we are talking about automatic determination of
> location. That definitely applies in the context of an LCP where
> the subject of the information is known to be a Device.
>
> In other cases, the more generic "Target" might be better. Once you
> get to conveyance, the means by which location is determined is
> largely irrelevant and it probably makes sense to go back to using
> Target. After all, we need to recognize the right of an individual
> to act as LG [1].
I'm happy to apply this interpretation in the latter sections of the
document.
Alissa
>
> We don't build non-Device LCPs. The rest of the architecture
> supports non-Device Targets.
>
> --Martin
>
> [1] The UN probably have more pressing issues, but maybe we'll see a
> resolution issued some day soon.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:acooper@cdt.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, 15 September 2009 5:06 AM
>> To: GEOPRIV
>> Cc: Thomson, Martin; Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
>> Subject: Re: [Geopriv] Device vs. Target Terminology
>>
>> I took a look back at how we use "Target" and "device" in geopriv-
>> arch. In section 2.3 (immediately following the section where
>> "Target"
>> is defined), we say the following:
>> The term "Target" may refer not only to an individual whose location
>> is described by a LO, but also to that individual's device, since the
>> device engages in protocol interactions, not the individual. For the
>> remainder of this document, the term "Target" refers to the device.
>> Geopriv can also be used to convey location information about a
>> device
>> that is not directly linked to a single individual, such as a package
>> or product containing a location-capable sensor, or a device linked
>> to
>> multiple individuals.
>> I think in some of the other documents we do the same thing that was
>> done here, which is to pick one term that is generally accurate but
>> may actually mean both target and device, or one or the other, in
>> some
>> contexts. The difference is that for geopriv-arch we chose Target,
>> whereas for the other documents we chose Device. My proposal:
>>
>> 1. Add the definition of Device from 3693 to section 2.2 of geopriv-
>> arch.
>> 2. Move the paragraph above from section 2.3 to section 2.2.
>> 3. Switch the convention established in that paragraph, so that we
>> use
>> "Device" in the remainder of the document rather than "Target,"
>> unless
>> the point being made explicitly deals with something related to the
>> person who is the Target (e.g., when we are discussing the person's
>> privacy interest, such as in 3.1.2 where we talk about "the real
>> identity of the Target.").
>>
>> I think that might clear up the confusion.
>>
>> Alissa
>>
>>
>> On Sep 6, 2009, at 7:56 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>>
>>> On Aug 23, 2009, at 8:26 PM, Thomson, Martin wrote:
>>>> For this second reason, Target is the right term to use when
>>>> discussing privacy. A Target is any entity that the location
>>>> information _could_ refer to, and who might have a stake in
>>>> ensuring that the information is protected.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm fairly certain this is the reason why Target is used in geopriv-
>>> arch -- because one of the primary motivations for writing the
>>> document was to explain the privacy architecture at a high level.
>>>
>>>> The arch document should recognize the distinction between the
>>>> two. We are building tools for Devices that aren't applicable in
>>>> the general sense to Targets. However, we need the generic
>>>> "Target" label.
>>>
>>> I will take a look through and see where it makes sense in the
>>> document to use Device instead of Target.
>>>
>>> Alissa
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --Martin
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org]
>>>>> On
>>>>> Behalf Of Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, 22 August 2009 4:13 AM
>>>>> To: geopriv@ietf.org
>>>>> Subject: [Geopriv] Device vs. Target Terminology
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> the 'device' vs 'target' terminology from
>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3693.txt is confusing for me, see:
>>>>>
>>>>> Target:
>>>>> The entity whose location is desired by the Location
>>>>> Recipient.
>>>>> In many cases the Target will be the human "user" of a
>> Device
>>>>> or an object such as a vehicle or shipping container to
>> which
>>>>> the Device is attached. In some instances the Target will
>> be
>>>>> the Device itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> Device:
>>>>> The technical device whereby the location is tracked as a
>>>>> proxy
>>>>> for the location of a Target.
>>>>>
>>>>> In http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-geopriv-arch-00.txt we talk
>>>>> about
>>>>> the Target but the device terminology is gone:
>>>>>
>>>>> Target: An individual or other entity whose location is sought
>> in
>>>>> the Geopriv architecture. The Target is the entity whose
>>>>> privacy
>>>>> Geopriv seeks to protect.
>>>>>
>>>>> [Btw, I only refer to entity instead of individual as in our
>>>>> protocol
>>>>> mechanisms there are no 'humans' as such only identifiers.]
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that we use the term 'device' in our documents.
>>>>> Examples:
>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-geopriv-http-location-
>> delivery-15
>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-winterbottom-geopriv-held-identity-
>>>>> extens
>>>>> ions-09.txt
>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sipcore-location-conveyance-
>> 01
>>>>> (Actually, we sometimes use Target and sometimes Device.)
>>>>>
>>>>> The differentiation between Target and Device only makes sense if
>>>>> there
>>>>> is a clear difference between the two.
>>>>>
>>>>> My question: Should we stick with the terminology used in
>>>>> draft-ietf-geopriv-arch-00.txt and not use device anymore? This
>>>>> would
>>>>> require us to run a find/replace action over a few of our
>> documents.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ciao
>>>>> Hannes
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Geopriv mailing list
>>>>> Geopriv@ietf.org
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------------------------
>>>> This message is for the designated recipient only and may
>>>> contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
>>>> If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
>>>> immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of
>>>> this email is prohibited.
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------------------------
>>>> [mf2]
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Geopriv mailing list
>>>> Geopriv@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Geopriv mailing list
>>> Geopriv@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This message is for the designated recipient only and may
> contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
> If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
> immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of
> this email is prohibited.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [mf2]
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
