W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > February 2012

RE: ACTION-49: Propose what the operational carve-outs for 3.6.1.2.1 (e.g. debugging by 3rd party) are

From: TOUBIANA, VINCENT (VINCENT) <Vincent.Toubiana@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 11:46:20 +0100
To: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>, Tracking Protection Working Group WG <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4D30AC7C2C82C64580A0E798A171B44448894353E0@FRMRSSXCHMBSD1.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
Shane,

Thanks for the clarification of these carve-outs. I have a couple of questions/ comments about the normative part.


Capping data collection and use SHOULD be limited to only campaign IDs and frequency counters where possible.



What would it take to make that a MUST? What are the other collected data that can be required for frequency capping?



Information such as what targeting criteria existed for a particular ad campaign MAY need to be retained for audit purposes to demonstrate an ad server met its obligations to an advertiser.



Could we have more detailed about these criteria. As I understand it, an ad campaign may be targeted on the following criteria:

- IP address (location and language),

- User Agent (take for instance the Chrome ad campaign),

- The visited website (contextual advertising).



Also could this sentence be rephrased "Information such as what targeting criteria existed for a particular ad campaign MAY need to be retained for audit purposes to demonstrate an ad server met its obligations to an advertiser."



Thanks,



Vincent
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2012 10:47:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:44 UTC