- From: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 17:03:21 +0200
- To: public-tracking@w3.org
On 2014-06-26 16:24, David Singer wrote: > Thank you for the analysis, I agree with your analysis of link > shorteners. (And I think the conversation has otherwise got off > track; we don’t need to debate the precise details of the 1st party > rules nor why we got to where we are, to resolve link shorteners.) > > Perhaps we can work towards text on link shorteners now? > > “For the avoidance of doubt, link shorteners are not destinations, and > not destinations that a user intends to visit, and hence are third > parties as defined in this recommendation.” ? Do you intend that as a replacement of my earlier proposal or as a friendly amendment? Not that I'm overly attached to my proposal, it is mostly intended as a logical conclusion of the principles expressed in the already existing editor's draft of the 1st party definition. Regards, Walter
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2014 15:03:51 UTC