Chapter 5 — What may be said about a booking
Lesson map
Lesson 05 published. Map, example, EX021.
flowchart TD
Q["Resident asks who holds Room 2"] --> N{"Does the answer need a name?"}
N -->|No| R["Give room and time only if that is their own booking"]
N -->|Yes| P["Stop and ask the owner before naming anyone"]
The drawing limits a spoken answer. It does not prove that the booking system hides names.
Logical drawing
question about another person's booking
|
+-- answer with room state only --> still check that the asker needs it
+-- answer with a name -----------> not authorized by this lesson
Learning outcomes
After this chapter, you should be able to:
- Separate a booking fact the asker needs from a fact about another person.
- Explain why a true statement can still be the wrong thing to say.
- Choose a reply that answers the operational question without naming a resident.
5.1 Confidentiality is about disclosure, not secrecy of the room
Confidentiality, in the ordinary security sense used in Chapter 1, means that information is not disclosed to someone who should not receive it. The room number on a library door is not confidential. The name of the person who reserved it can be, because the reservation connects a person to a place and a time. Harbor Library's exercise has no privacy statute to apply and no real patrons. The limit still matters: a practice that treats every true fact as sayable will train the wrong habit.
A resident at the desk asks, "Who has Room 2 at 14:00?" The worker can see, in the synthetic table, that SYN-001 is a confirmed booking for Room 2 at 14:00. The table in this book does not even contain a resident name. Inventing one in order to be helpful would create personal data the exercise removed on purpose in Chapter 2.
5.2 Worked example
The operational question hiding inside the spoken question is usually "Can I use Room 2 at 14:00?" That question can be answered from the booking state.
| Asker's words | Fact the worker has | Reply that stays inside the exercise | Reply that leaves it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who has Room 2 at 14:00? | SYN-001 confirmed, no name stored |
"That slot is already booked. I can't use this sheet to say who." | A made-up name, or a guess from the event list |
| Is Room 2 free at 15:00? | SYN-002 confirmed after 09:00 |
"The current exercise record shows 15:00 as booked. I will not confirm a change from the 09:00 paper." | "It's free" because the paper omitted SYN-002 |
The second row reuses the stale-paper rule from Chapter 4. The new point is the first row: even a current record does not authorize naming a person who is not in the record.
5.3 What this chapter does not decide
It does not decide that every library must hide reservation names, or that a name is always sensitive. A library could have a posted public program that lists a speaker's name because that person agreed to be listed. Harbor Library's booking exercise has no such agreement and no name field. Staff who need a name for a safety reason ask the owner and record why. They do not borrow a name from the announcement contacts, which Chapter 3 left outside the booking path.
Chapter 5 summary
A true booking state can be shared when it answers the asker's own question. A person's identity is a different disclosure. This exercise has no names to give, and inventing one is not customer service.
Chapter 5 exercises
EX021 — Answer the person in front of you
- Objective: Refuse an unnecessary disclosure without hiding the room state.
- Input: A resident asks who booked Room 2 at 14:00. The synthetic row is
SYN-001, confirmed, with no name. - Safe condition: Do not invent a resident and do not open a live site.
- Task: Write the reply you would say, and name the fact you deliberately leave out.
- Expected evidence: One spoken reply and one withheld item.
- Rubric: Credit if the slot is described as booked and no person is named or invented.
Continue studying — chapter 05 of 20
← Chapter 04 · Course chapter index · Chapter 06 →
Continue to the next authored lesson.