Re: proposed TSV for potential consent

On Apr 23, 2013, at 2:10 AM, "Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)" <mts-std@schunter.org> wrote:

> Hi Roy,
> 
> 
> thanks for proposing text. Some comments:
> - could you explain why you introduced an "edit" resource instead of using the "control" resource
> - "edit" gives the impression that out of band consent can be changed; this is not always the case

The name of the "control" member was changed back to "edit" (its original name) when I applied the other name change from "first-party" to "controller", since having both a controller array and a control link seemed confusing.

I am happy to use a different name if we can think of one, but it is the same link in both cases. The edit link is a common idiom.

> - I believe that the 48h is a permitted use "short-term retention"
>  and (a) should not be the default and (b) should be moved to the compliance spec

I am confused, but I agree that each of these variables should be discussed and placed where appropriate. I just wanted to get some text out to avoid yet another round of talking without text.

....Roy

> 
> On 23/04/2013 08:03, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> Bah, resend with a fixed subject ...
>> 
>> I think this is related to ISSUE-195, but really should have been
>> raised as a separate issue.
>> 
>> There was a long discussion about a new tracking status for systems
>> that only track by consent but do not actually determine consent
>> during request time, originally requested by Alex and more recently
>> by Ronan.  Unfortunately, the discussion kept going in the weeds,
>> at least partly because people mistook the request as an expansion
>> on the existing consent (C) response.
>> 
>> So, I have written a proposal within the editors' draft as a new
>> option with a TSV of P for potential consent.
>> 
>> ....Roy
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> Resent-From: public-tracking-commit@w3.org
>>> From: "CVS User rfieldin" <cvsmail@w3.org>
>>> Subject: CVS WWW/2011/tracking-protection/drafts
>>> Date: April 22, 2013 4:11:49 PM PDT
>>> To: public-tracking-commit@w3.org
>>> Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/E1UUPtl-0006gx-Ok@gil.w3.org>
>>> 
>>> Update of /w3ccvs/WWW/2011/tracking-protection/drafts
>>> In directory gil:/tmp/cvs-serv25723/drafts
>>> 
>>> Modified Files:
>>>    tracking-dnt.html
>>> Log Message:
>>> ISSUE-195: Add a TSV option for potential consent (P) to address Ronan's use case
>>> 
>>> --- /w3ccvs/WWW/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html    2013/04/22 21:28:40    1.201
>>> +++ /w3ccvs/WWW/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html    2013/04/22 23:11:49    1.202
>>> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
>>>      wgPublicList: "public-tracking",
>>>      wgPatentURI: "http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/49311/status",
>>>      issueBase:   "http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/",
>>> -      noIDLSectionTitle: true,
>>> +      noIDLSectionTitle: true
>>>    };
>>>  </script>
>>>  <link rel="stylesheet" href="additional.css" type="text/css" media="screen" title="custom formatting for TPWG editors">
>>> @@ -544,8 +544,10 @@
>>> <dfn>TSV</dfn>    = "1"              ; "1" — first-party
>>>       / "3"              ; "3" — third-party
>>>       / %x43             ; "C" - consent
>>> +       / %x50             ; "P" - potential consent
>>>       / %x44             ; "D" - disregarding
>>>       / %x4E             ; "N" - none
>>> +       / %x50             ; "P" - potential consent
>>>       / %x55             ; "U" - updated
>>>       / %x58             ; "X" - dynamic
>>>       / ( "!" [testv] )  ; "!" - non-compliant
>>> @@ -660,6 +662,42 @@
>>>          </p>
>>>        </section>
>>> 
>>> +        <section id='TSV-P' class="option">
>>> +          <h4>Potential Consent (P)</h4>
>>> +          <p>
>>> +            A tracking status value of <dfn>P</dfn> means that the origin
>>> +            server does not know, in real-time, whether it has received prior
>>> +            consent for tracking this user, user agent, or device, but
>>> +            promises not to use any <code>DNT:1</code> data until such consent
>>> +            has been determined, and further promises to de-identify within
>>> +            forty-eight hours any <code>DNT:1</code> data received for which
>>> +            such consent has not been received.
>>> +          </p>
>>> +          <p>
>>> +            Since this status value does not itself indicate whether a
>>> +            specific request is tracked, an origin server that sends a
>>> +            <code>P</code> tracking status value MUST provide an
>>> +            <code><a>edit</a></code> member in the corresponding tracking
>>> +            status representation that links to a resource for obtaining
>>> +            consent status.
>>> +          </p>
>>> +          <p>
>>> +            The <code>P</code> tracking status value is specifically meant to
>>> +            address audience survey systems for which determining consent at
>>> +            the time of a request is either impractical, due to legacy systems
>>> +            not being able to keep up with Web traffic, or potentially "gamed"
>>> +            by first party sites if they can determine which of their users
>>> +            have consented. It cannot be used for the sake of personalization
>>> +            unless consent is determined at the time of a request, in which
>>> +            case the <code><a>C</a></code> tracking status is preferred.
>>> +          </p>
>>> +          <p class="issue" data-number="195" title="Flows and signals for handling out of band consent">
>>> +            <b>[OPEN]</b> The <code><a>P</a></code> tracking status
>>> +            value indicates a special case of general data collection which
>>> +            is then trimmed to exclude those without out of band consent.
>>> +          </p>
>>> +        </section>
>>> +
>>>        <section id='TSV-D' class="option">
>>>          <h4>Disregarding (D)</h4>
>>>          <p>
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2013 10:36:54 UTC