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: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 06:38:50 -0800
To: "TOUBIANA, VINCENT (VINCENT)" <Vincent.Toubiana@alcatel-lucent.com>, Tracking Protection Working Group WG <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8023D0C425AA5@SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com>
Vincent,

On the frequency capping language, I left it as a SHOULD as unique identifiers and time stamps will likely be necessary for many implementations.  The goal with the SHOULD language is to advance industry thinking towards leveraging this information outside of a server (e.g.  the cookie-based approach that Jonathan shared in Brussels but that industry hasn't been able to scale yet without creating other privacy concerns such as extensive use of local stores).

There are many data elements necessary for auditing and I believe it would be difficult to enumerate them all without much broader industry participation in generating a list that would serve today's needs and not limit tomorrow's innovative developments.  For example, "position on the page", "URL of the page", "targeting criteria used for placement", "contextual keywords for contextual ads", etc.

I'm fine with the removal of "need to" in the sentence.

- Shane

From: TOUBIANA, VINCENT (VINCENT) [mailto:Vincent.Toubiana@alcatel-lucent.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 3:46 AM
To: Shane Wiley; Tracking Protection Working Group WG
Subject: RE: ACTION-49: Propose what the operational carve-outs for 3.6.1.2.1 (e.g. debugging by 3rd party) are

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 14:39:50 UTC

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