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

Re: [ISSUE-5] What is the definition of tracking?

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 16:46:28 -0800
Cc: Tracking Protection Working Group WG <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3EDA4682-DFE8-4378-A854-19CEE7429CD1@gbiv.com>
To: John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>
On Mar 6, 2012, at 3:43 PM, John Simpson wrote:

> Roy,
> 
> I support your definition of tracking and thank you for offering it. It should be included at least as an option in the next public working draft of the Compliance and Scope spec.
> 
> As you know, you and I have different views about the need for some definitions.  I'm a minimalist and behavioralist. If definitions are contentious you simply don't need to go there. A DNT spec need only state how to send the message, how to respond and what the obligations are when the message is received.  You don't need a theological or philosophical explanation of why, in my view.
> 
> However, if the WG believes we need to define tracking,  then your definition does so in a straight-forward way that is in keeping with user expectations.

Thanks John,

> I do have clarifying questions:  As I read you text it would preclude passive fingerprinting (i.e. IP address + User-Agent logs).  Am I correct?  Should we specifically call out that practice?

Yes.  My Tracking definition includes identifying in general,
including passive fingerprinting, and the third bullet under
mechanisms for performing tracking is a technical description
of "fingerprinting".  This can be highlighted in the details
through a use-case that specifically talks about fingerprinting.

Cheers,

....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 00:46:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 21 June 2013 10:11:26 UTC